In footage captured on the Mavi Marmara, activists are seen attacking the soldiers with a stun grenade, a box of plates, and water hoses as the soldiers attempt to board the ship. the activists are also waiving around metal rods and chains later used to attack the soldiers with. The IDF soldiers were armed with paint ball guns (used for riot dispersal) and pistols which they were ordered to use only as a last resort.

In the early hours of the 31st of May 2010, IDF soldiers boarded the ships of the “Free Gaza” Flotilla, after the ships refused to redirect their course. Aboard the Mavi Marmara the soldiers encountered serious violence when, in a preplanned attack, the activists on board lynched the soldiers with knives, metal rods and stole two of their guns. As a result 7 soldiers were injured and 9 activists were killed.

The IDF commandos, during the operation to redirect the Gaza flotilla, boarded the Mavi Marmara in the early hours of May 31st, 2010. When they attempted to board, activists, in a prepared attack, lynched the soldiers and stole two pistols.

In this footage you can hear the radio exchange between soldiers on their way to the bridge and the IDF ship. The soldiers report encountering live fire and serious violence.

he following is a transcript of the dialogue heard in the IDF clip:

– I need reinforcements here with me

– He wants to pass underneath

– Wait, one is in front of me

– It’s coming from all directions

– We need to be evacuated, now

– Tell him that he’s close already-

– Real weapons, real weapons (ie.guns)

– They have real weapons?

– Yes, yes, real weapons

– They are firing on us

– There is live fire below

– Live fire below

– Live fire here

– Shoot him where is he?

– Negative

For more information about the incidents aboard the Mavi Marmara: http://www.idfspokesperson.com
http://www.idf.il/english

Israel Pulls Diplomats Families Out of Turkey – Politics.

The Foreign Ministry has ordered families of diplomats in Turkey to leave the country immediately as anti-Israel rage boils over following the flotilla clash. The ministry said there is no sign of a break in diplomatic relations between the two nations, although Ankara has recalled its ambassador from Tel Aviv.

Turkey has led the anti-Israeli broadside even before Israel stopped the flotilla from trying to reach the Hamas-controlled Gaza coast, where the Oslo Accords have retained Israeli sovereignty.

Ankara assisted the Muslim-based IHH organization that sponsored the flotilla with the aim of breaking the embargo on Hamas, which over the past several years has smuggled in to Gaza long-range missiles, hundreds of tons explosives, arms, ammunition and terrorists.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu warned before the flotilla began its voyage that Israel should allow it to reach Gaza and cancel the embargo against Hamas. “Tensions should be avoided and the siege on Gaza lifted,” he told reporters lat week. The Turkish government promised reprisals if the Israeli Navy were to stop the flotilla, and it has carried through on its vow with international media and diplomatic condemnations of Israel.

Similar to virtually every other country in the world, Turkey made no mention of the documented violence and lynch instigated by Muslim militants, many of them from Turkey.

“Turkey now is one of the sides in the Middle East conflict. It is quite clearly opposed to Israel,” said writer Sami Kohen, a veteran Turkish political analyst and columnist, quoted by the Christian Science Monitor. “This event is almost a climax in this shift.”

He added, “There is now more reason for Turkey to take a more active part in the events of the Middle East, since it has suffered personally from this attack. Now it can justify its anti-Israeli positions, which get a good deal of sympathy in the Arab and Islamic world.”

Turkey had been a diplomatic friend of Israel for two decades until last year’s Operation Cast Lead war against Hamas terrorists coincided with the changing diplomatic winds that have catapulted Iran into a position of possibly becoming dominant in the Middle East.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (pictured) has simultaneously broken off participation in annual military drills with Israel while increasing defense ties with the Syrian-Iranian axis.

The country’s Today’s Zayman news site reported Tuesday that the government may even cancel defense contracts with Israel worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

However, the trade ties with Israel work both ways, and Turkey may not want to lose its benefits, at least not for the time being. Turkey has bought defense products from Israel, but the Jewish State in return imports military textiles from Ankara.

Turkey, a popular destination for Israeli vacationers, has suffered a sharp drop in Israeli tourism since the flotilla clash Monday. In addition, El Al and the Turkish airline Atlasjet have postponed the launching of new flights, using Atlasjet planes, between Istanbul and Ben Gurion International Airport.  (IsraelNationalNews.com)

Iran Trying to Arm Hamas in Gaza – HUMAN EVENTS.

Media attack on Israel is par for the course.

The front pages of various European newspapers on June 1, with headlines about Israeli navy commandos storming a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. Reader says Israel is a convenient scapegoat for the international media, who miss the real issues.

Photograph by: Thomas Coex, AFP-Getty Images, Calgary Herald

American Thinker: Muslims Killing Muslims in the Name of Jihad.

By Norman Berdichevsky

A few days ago, one of the most violent incidents involving the slaughter of innocent civilians took place in Lahore and several kilometers away in Garhi Shahu, Pakistan. There has been essentially no media interest, such as on-the-spot coverage or interviews with survivors. The victims were all Ahmadis, a “deviant” sect within Islam. Ahmadis comprise the sect that is distinguished as being the most peaceful; they have always lived in peace with their neighbors, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

The Ahmadis were attacked by those “mainstream” Muslims who are sympathizers of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Pakistan. These Muslims attacked the two Ahmadi mosques packed with hundreds of worshipers. At least eighty people were killed. The assaults in Lahore were carried out by at least seven men, including three suicide bombers. Some of the attackers acted as snipers from an adjacent mosque to kill their fellow Muslims.

Ahmadis are reviled as heretics by mainstream Muslims for their belief that their sect’s founder was a savior foretold by the Quran, Islam’s holy book. The group has experienced years of state-sanctioned discrimination and occasional attacks in Pakistan, but never before in such a large and coordinated fashion.

Not one reputable, representative, acknowledged Muslim religious leader anywhere has seen fit so far to issue a condemnation of the attack. Not one media commentary anywhere (except in Israel) saw fit to mention that the only place within the Middle East where Ahmadis live in peace and harmony with their neighbors and enjoy full civil and religious rights is Israel.

The Kababir neighborhood in Haifa was established in 1928. The neighborhood’s first mosque on Mount Carmel was built in 1931, and a larger grand mosque was built in the 1970s. The grand mosque has two white minarets standing one hundred feet tall. They dominate the low-rise skyline of the residential neighborhoods on the ridges nearby. The mosque is subsidized entirely by the members of the local Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.

As noted authority Bernard Lewis has so cogently argued, although a majority of Muslims at any given time may not be motivated by considerations of jihad, the phrase “Islamic terrorism” is apt, because

Islam has had an essentially political character … from its very foundation … to the present day. An intimate association between religion and politics, between power and cult, marks a principal distinction between Islam and other religions. … In traditional Islam and therefore also in resurgent fundamentalist Islam, God is the sole source of sovereignty. God is the head of the state. The state is God’s state. The “army is God’s army. The treasury is God’s treasury, and the enemy, of course, is God’s enemy.”

Jihad is directed not “just” against the unbelievers (the kaffirs, i.e., non-Mulsims), but all those who have “deviated” — the Shi’ites, the  Alawites, the Ahmadis, the Druze, Bahais, Yazidis, etc. It is holy war by armed resistance to all those who do not accept Muhammad’s message as interpreted by the sacred traditions hallowed by all the schools of Sunni jurisprudence across fourteen hundred years of history. But for our president and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism John Brennan, there is the unshakable but blind, deaf, and dumb conviction that as they interpret it, Islam is a peaceful and noble religion that has been distorted by a “tiny minority,” and jihad means a peaceful striving with oneself to overcome evil tendencies, notwithstanding the facts of:

1. The eight-year-long war between Iraq and Iran resulting in almost a million killed.

2. The First Gulf War; Invasion of Kuwait (Aug. 1990-Feb.1991), Operation Desert Storm, the Second Gulf War, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

3. Massive violence between Muslims and Hindus in India following partition and three India-Pakistan wars, terrorism in Kashmir and India resulting in several million killed and at least fifteen million people displaced.

4. Pakistan-Bangladesh conflict, 1971 (following civil war and secession). This war saw the highest number of casualties in any of the India-Pakistan conflicts. It is believed that from one to three million Bangladeshis were killed as a result of this war. Very little media coverage.

5. Ongoing Yemeni and Somali Civil Wars. Thousands killed. No media coverage.

6. Inter-sectarian Muslim violence between Shias and Sunnis in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

7. Border disputes between Syria and Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

8. Jordan’s crackdown on “Black September,” 1970. PLO crushed by Jordanian Legion under command of King Hussein (at least 25,000 killed).

9. Syria’s suppression of the Muslim Brothers and opponents of the Assad regime; destruction of the city of Hama (at least 20,000 killed) to wipe out Muslim Brotherhood. Media barred from entering the city. Uprising in Hama by Muslim Brotherhood crushed by Assad regime in Syria Feb. 1982.

10. Al-Qaeda and Taliban violence in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

11. Inter-Palestinian factionalism in Gaza; dozens killed.

12. Decade-long mass violence between Muslim religious extremists (Salafist movement) and Algerian government beginning in 1991 estimated to have cost between 150,000 and 200,000 lives.

13. Sixteen-year-long civil war in Lebanon. The war lasted from 1975 to 1990 and resulted in an estimated 130,000 to 250,000 civilian fatalities. Another one million people (one-third of the population) were wounded, half of whom were left with lifetime disabilities.

14. Iraqi, Iranian, and Turkish suppression of Kurdish autonomy; approximately 180,000 Kurds killed, mostly civilians in Iraq, by Saddam Hussein’s forces via poison gas attacks.

15. Muslim terror against civilians in Chechnya, and additional hundreds killed in Moscow and other Russian cities including children at primary school. Russia’s two biggest terrorist attacks both came from Muslim groups. The Chechnyan separatist “Special Purpose Islamic Regiment” took an estimated 850 people hostage in Moscow in October 2002 at a theater. At least 129 hostages died during the rescue, all but one killed by the chemicals used to subdue the attackers.

In the September 2004, 1,200 schoolchildren and adults were taken hostage at a secondary school in Beslan, North Ossetia-Alania, which was overrun by an Islamic terror group. About 500 people, including 186 children, died in the attempt to free the hostages. According to the only surviving attacker, Nur-Pashi Kulayev, the choice of a school and the targeting of mothers and young children by the attackers was carried out in order to generate the maximum outrage possible and ignite a wider war in the Caucasus with the ultimate goal of establishing an Islamic Emirate across the whole of the North Caucasus.

16. Muslim secessionist activity and terrorism in the Philippines (with almost monthly reports by American media that do not mention the words “Muslim” or “jihad”).

17. Darfur in the Sudan; genocidal attacks against non-Muslim Black Sudanese. On July 13, 2008, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court filed ten charges of war crimes against Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir, charges that included three counts of genocide, five crimes against humanity, and two of murder. The ICC’s prosecutors have claimed that al-Bashir “masterminded and implemented a plan to destroy in substantial part” three tribal groups in Darfur because of their ethnicity.

18. Muslim grievances and violence in Thailand.

19. Terrorist activity against the Han Chinese in Western China. More than a hundred fatalities.

20. Division of Cyprus to satisfy Turkish Muslim minority.

21. Muslim unrest and violence against Christians in Nigeria and Ghana; several thousand killed. No media interest.

22. Muslim terrorist attacks against the U.S. in New York and Washington. Almost 3,000 civilians killed.

23. Terrorist attacks throughout Europe — London Underground, Atocha Train Station in Madrid; in Africa at American embassy in Kenya; in Bali nightclub where most victims were Australian tourists; foiled attempts in the U.S. and elsewhere.

24. Jihadi-inspired sniper and terror attacks by deranged lone Muslims in the United States against military bases (Ft. Hood), synagogues, and airports, and at Times Square.

25. Continued terrorist attacks against the State of Israel and Jews throughout the world.

26.Widespread piracy on a scale not seen for 150 years along the Somali coast of East Africa preying upon international shipping.

27. Indonesian Muslim suppression of East Timor population’s (98%) desire for independence. Tens of thousands of civilians killed or died from malnutrition, imprisonment (1974-1998).

28. Continued civil war in West Sahara between the Polisario Movement and Moroccan authorities , low-level guerrilla attacks and hundreds of thousands of displaced refuges.

In the above-mentioned conflicts, wars, massacres, and atrocities, the primary and majority of victims have been Muslims killed by other Muslims in the name of Islam and “jihad.” Where Muslims have been at risk of displacement and under attack in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Kuwait, their rescue was made possible only by the efforts of the United States.

Alan Dershowitz: Israel\’s Actions Were Entirely Lawful Though Probably Unwise.

Although the wisdom of Israel’s actions in stopping the Gaza flotilla is open to question, the legality of its actions is not. What Israel did was entirely consistent with both international and domestic law. In order to understand why Israel acted within its rights, the complex events at sea must be deconstructed.

First, there is the Israeli blockade of Gaza, which included a naval blockade. Recall that when Israel ended its occupation of Gaza, it did not impose a blockade. Indeed it left behind agricultural facilities in the hope that the newly liberated Gaza Strip would become a peaceful and productive area. Instead Hamas seized control over Gaza and engaged in acts of warfare against Israel. These acts of warfare featured anti-personnel rockets, nearly 10,000 of them, directed at Israeli civilians. This was not only an act of warfare, it was a war crime. Israel responded to the rockets by declaring a blockade, the purpose of which was to assure that no rockets, or other material that could be used for making war against Israeli civilians, was permitted into Gaza. Israel allowed humanitarian aid through its checkpoints. Egypt as well participated in the blockade. There was never a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, merely a shortage of certain goods that would end if the rocket attacks ended.

The legality of blockades as a response to acts of war is not subject to serious doubt. When the United States blockaded Cuba during the missile crisis, the State Department issued an opinion declaring the blockade to be lawful. This, despite the fact that Cuba had not engaged in any act of belligerency against the United States. Other nations have similarly enforced naval blockades to assure their own security.

The second issue is whether it is lawful to enforce a legal blockade in international waters. Again, law and practice are clear. If there is no doubt that the offending ships have made a firm determination to break the blockade, then the blockade may be enforced before the offending ships cross the line into domestic waters. Again the United States and other western countries have frequently boarded ships at high sea in order to assure their security.

Third, were those on board the flotilla innocent non-combatants or did they lose that status once they agreed to engage in the military act of breaking the blockade? Let there be no mistake about the purpose of this flotilla. It was decidedly not to provide humanitarian aid to the residents of Gaza, but rather the break the entirely lawful Israeli military blockade. The proof lies in the fact that both Israel and Egypt offered to have all the food, medicine and other humanitarian goods sent to Gaza, if the boats agreed to land in an Israeli or Egyptian port. That humanitarian offer was soundly rejected by the leaders of the flotilla who publicly announced:

“This mission is not about delivering humanitarian supplies, it’s about breaking Israel’s siege on 1.5 million Palestinians.” (AFP, May 27, 2010.) 

The act of breaking a military siege is itself a military act, and those knowingly participating in such military action put in doubt their status as non-combatants.

It is a close question whether “civilians” who agree too participate in the breaking of a military blockade have become combatants. They are certainly something different than pure, innocent civilians, and perhaps they are also somewhat different from pure armed combatants. They fit uncomfortably onto the continuum of civilianality that has come to characterize asymmetrical warfare.

Finally, we come to the issue of the right of self-defense engaged in by Israeli soldiers who were attacked by activists on the boat. There can be little doubt that the moment any person on the boat picked up a weapon and began to attack Israeli soldiers boarding the vessel, they lost their status as innocent civilians. Even if that were not the case, under ordinary civilian rules of self defense, every Israeli soldier had the right to protect himself and his colleagues from attack by knife and pipe wielding assailants. Less there be any doubt that Israeli soldiers were under attack, simply view the videoand watch, as so-called peaceful “activists” repeatedly pummel Israeli soldiers with metal rods. Every individual has the right to repel such attacks by the use of lethal force, especially when the soldiers were so outnumbered on the deck of the ship. Recall that Israel’s rules of engagement required its soldiers to fire only paintballs unless their lives were in danger. Would any country in the world deny its soldiers the right of self-defense under comparable circumstances?

Notwithstanding the legality of Israel’s actions, the international community has once again ganged up on Israel. In doing so, Israel’s critics have failed to pinpoint precisely what Israel did that allegedly violates international law. Some have wrongly focused on the blockade itself. Others have erroneously pointed to the location of the boarding in international waters. Most have simply pointed to the deaths of so-called peace activists, though these deaths appear to be the result of lawful acts of self-defense. None of these factors alone warrant condemnation, but the end result surely deserves scrutiny by Israeli policy makers. There can be little doubt that the mission was a failure, as judged by its results. It is important, however, to distinguish between faulty policies on the one hand, and alleged violations of international law on the other hand. Only the latter would warrant international intervention, and the case has simply not been made that Israel violated international law.

JPost.com | BlogCentral | Inside the Middle East | Obama, Israel and American Jews.

Commentary asked “31 prominent American Jews” to respond to these questions: “Can Obama’s Jewish supporters act in a way that will change the unmistakable direction of current American policy emanating from the White House? Will American Jews accept Barack Obama’s view that the state of Israel bears some responsibility for the loss of American ‘blood and treasure’ in the Middle East? Will they continue to extend their support to the Obama administration and to Barack Obama’s political party?” My answer, from “Obama, Israel & American Jews: The Challenge – A Symposium,” in the June issue of Commentary:

While “I-told-you-so” vindication feels good (I was senior Middle East adviser to Rudy Giuliani’s campaign), it is no substitute for the urgent re-education of Barack Obama.

No American president has ever entered the Oval Office with so many bad ideas about the Middle East, half-baked in the ovens of the Middle East departments at Columbia and the University of Chicago. Two of these ideas are particularly pernicious and might be described as the Khalidi Doctrine, after Rashid Khalidi, the Palestinian-American professor who gave Obama his Middle East primer at Chicago. First, the American resort to force in the Middle East is always counterproductive; second, the unresolved Palestine problem is the hinge on which the entire Middle East turns.

Guided by these two ideas, Obama’s ship ran aground almost as soon as it left port. The diplomatic drive to tame Iran was bound to stall without the backup of a credible military threat – the willingness to use force, despite its downsides. The implosion of Plan A, “engagement,” has left a strategic vacuum, which only now the administration is beginning to fill with stiffer rhetoric. And putting the Palestine problem front and center has only incited the intransigence of the Arabs in general and the Palestinians in particular. By declaring a peace deal a “vital American interest” and tussling with the Netanyahu government, Obama merely jacked up the Palestinian asking price for renewing negotiations and everything else.

As the two pillars of the Khalidi Doctrine crumble under the weight of reality, champions of an alternative approach are finally getting some traction. They insist that US diplomacy toward Iran is doomed, absent the threat to use force if talks fail. And they argue that tinkering with the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process” is a dangerous distraction from the main event: Iran.

How do we know whether these ideas are making inroads? First, there was the “dual loyalty” smearing of Dennis Ross by an anonymous administration official, which looked like a desperate lunge to head off just this kind of rethinking. Second, the president of the weather vane called the Council on Foreign Relations suddenly reversed direction: chasing an Israeli-Palestinian deal, he announced, is “a distraction that would benefit neither the US nor Israel, given an Iranian threat that is close at hand and a promise of peace that is distant.” To judge from these gyrations, the re-education of Barack Obama has begun.

What can American Jews do to accelerate it? They must keep their and Obama’s eyes squarely on the ball. When Obama visited the town of Sderot during his campaign, he declared that “a nuclear Iran would be a game-changing situation not just in the Middle East but around the world. Whatever remains of our nuclear non-proliferation framework, I think, would begin to disintegrate.” That is the Obama for whom most Jewish Democrats cast their votes: a president who would secure the greater peace. Call it the Sderot Pledge: American Jews must unite around it and hold Obama to it.

Martin Kramer is senior fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem, and Wexler-Fromer fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

Tags: Israel Obama Pro-Hamas flotilla Turkey

Turkish terrorists beat up Israel troops

DEBKAfile reports: Early Wednesday, June 2, US president Barack Obama stepped into the fast-deteriorating flotilla crisis to stop it from spinning out of control. In secret phone calls, he asked Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu to release all the remaining passengers without delay as well as the six ships. He then tried to reason with the incandescent Turkish prime minister Recep Erdogan, who had just branded the Israeli raid a “bloody massacre.”

Offering deep condolences for the loss of life aboard the flotilla, the US president said better ways must be found to bring humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza without undermining Israel’s security. He supported the UN Security Council’s call for “a credible, impartial and transparent investigation” of the event, but refused to condemn Israel or take the inquiry out of its hands.

DEBKAfile reports from Ankara that Erdogan declined to be talked round, declaring that ifAmerica did not punish Israel for insolently “trampling on human honor”, Turkey would.

Overnight, Israel began evacuating diplomats’ families from Turkey. Diplomatic and consular staff were left in place in Ankara and Istanbul and told along with security firms to stand by for departure.

Netanyahu called the second security cabinet meeting in two days after the first on Tuesday approved the continued blockade of Gaza against all attempts to break it.

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad again threatened Israel with destruction for any action it may take  anywhere and its Western supporters with international trial as war criminals.

Israel is preparing for Ankara’s next steps that would defy President Obama’s bid to find a way out of the crisis between the two former allies. In Jerusalem, Erdogan’s accusations were deemed an unfounded and unjustified assault considering the evidence that he had consorted with terrorists, including an al Qaeda offshoot, to bring Israel under pressure in support of the Palestinian extremist Hamas.

This evidence released by the IDF Monday night, June 1, described how the Turkish Marmara, the flotilla’s lead vessel, had been commandeered by terrorists indirectly supported by the Ankara government’s subsidy to the Turkish Insani Yardim Vakfi – IHH, which is listed by the American CIA as an al Qaeda-linked Islamist terrorist organization with bases in Turkey, Bosnia and Bulgaria.

Those passengers attested to more than a hundred members of terrorist organizations aboard acting like a quasi-military group with a command hierarchy, whose leader forced the other four or five hundred passengers to fall into line behind them. The group was split into sub-sections, each in charge of a section of the ship before and after it set sail from Istanbul. Its members were all armed with an assortment of chains, iron bars and knives as well as night goggles and gas masks.

Although they appeared to hail from different terrorist organizations from various countries, they were all ordered to say they belonged to the IHH.
The group kept the ship to a strict military regiment, including round-the-clock guards in the different sections of the Marmara.

When the ship was brought to Ashdod port and the passengers removed early Tuesday, the IHH members were found without identification papers of any kind. Either the Turkish authorities atIstanbul were instructed to let them embark aboard the Marmara without documents or they threw them overboard before the ship docked at Ashdod. Each had an envelope stuffed with thousands of dollars.

DEBKAfile‘s intelligence sources disclose that, when first brought in, the Turkish terror activists refused to answer questions. By Tuesday nightfall, a few began talking and admitted to being members of IHH and its ties with al Qaeda’s Balkan outfit. Throughout the interrogations, Israelintelligence was in contact with colleagues in Western services for help to identify them by means of fingerprints and other physical features.
Our counter-terror sources report that Israel must now decide whether to prosecute some of the activists, including Israeli Arabs, on board the Marmara, on charges of collaborating with an international terrorist organization.

During Tuesday, Israel began deporting the 679 passengers – including 128 for Arab countries through Jordan. The rest will be flown out within 48 hours. Three Turkish jets were due to collect them Wednesday. Eight Israel trucks brought assistance products from the ships to GazaTuesday; another 10 will make deliveries Wednesday.

Israel intelligence agencies too have questions to answer – principally, how they missed spotting the terrorist presence aboard the putative aid-for-Gaza convoy and let a naval force undertake the mission to divert the ships to Ashdod, without preparing them for a violent confrontation with a determined, well-organized group of violent men.

Turkey under the new “Islamic” regime seems intent on joining the “Jihad” against the West, starting with the easiest target… Der “Juden.”

If Obama doesn’t wake up, let’s pray the American electorate does come November.  This isn’t about “health care” this is about survival of the European enlightenment as carried forward by the American revolution.

Folks, this is SERIOUS stuff.  Believe it or not, radical Islam represents a greater threat to our way of life than even the worst communist excesses.  It’s here and it’s making headway.  We stop them now, or God help the world as we know it.

Turkey Slams US\’s Response To Israel, Demands Condemnation Of Raid.

WASHINGTON — Turkey demanded on Tuesday that the United States condemn the botched Israeli raid on an aid flotilla that ended with Israeli soldiers killing nine activists.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told reporters ahead of a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that Turkey was disappointed with the Obama administration’s response to the raid.

He said that he had scheduled a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Monday to discuss indirect talks with Syria before Netanyahu canceled his trip Sunday.

The White House has reacted cautiously, asking for disclosure of the full facts about the raid. The killings have put the administration in an awkward position between two allies at a time that it is trying to refocus Middle East peace talks and win new sanctions against Iran in the United Nations Security Council.

In a sign of the sensitivity of the raid on U.S.-Turkish relations, the State Department closed coverage of the meeting to the press. It had previously scheduled a photo opportunity, a venue in which reporters probably would have tried to ask questions.

Before they met, however, Davutoglu was perfectly open about the message he would convey to Clinton.

“I have to be frank: I am not very happy with this statement from Washington yesterday,” Davutoglu said. “We expect a clear condemnation.”

He said that Turkey, a NATO member, would bring up the issue soon at the security alliance’s council.

“Citizens of member states were attacked by a country that is not a member of NATO,” he said. “I think you can make some conclusions out of this statement.”

Davutoglu said that there was no need to wait for an investigation of the killings, because in Turkey’s view the raid was illegal under international law because it happened in international waters.

“This is a criminal act,” he said. “We don’t need to make an investigation to see this.”

Davutoglu also contrasted his criticism of the United States with praise of the statements by the European Union.

Though Turkish-Israeli relations have been rocky for some time, Davutoglu said Turkey had been looking for ways to help facilitate peace talks. He said that he had scheduled a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Monday to discuss indirect talks with Syria before Netanyahu canceled his trip Sunday.

Davutoglu said that he discussed the raid with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Sunday, and Barak had offered condolences.Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu told reporters ahead of a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that Turkey was disappointed with the Obama administration’s response to the raid.

He said that he had scheduled a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Monday to discuss indirect talks with Syria before Netanyahu canceled his trip Sunday.

The White House has reacted cautiously, asking for disclosure of the full facts about the raid. The killings have put the administration in an awkward position between two allies at a time that it is trying to refocus Middle East peace talks and win new sanctions against Iran in the United Nations Security Council.

In a sign of the sensitivity of the raid on U.S.-Turkish relations, the State Department closed coverage of the meeting to the press. It had previously scheduled a photo opportunity, a venue in which reporters probably would have tried to ask questions.

Before they met, however, Davutoglu was perfectly open about the message he would convey to Clinton.

“I have to be frank: I am not very happy with this statement from Washington yesterday,” Davutoglu said. “We expect a clear condemnation.”

He said that Turkey, a NATO member, would bring up the issue soon at the security alliance’s council.

“Citizens of member states were attacked by a country that is not a member of NATO,” he said. “I think you can make some conclusions out of this statement.”

Davutoglu said that there was no need to wait for an investigation of the killings, because in Turkey’s view the raid was illegal under international law because it happened in international waters.

“This is a criminal act,” he said. “We don’t need to make an investigation to see this.”

Davutoglu also contrasted his criticism of the United States with praise of the statements by the European Union.

Though Turkish-Israeli relations have been rocky for some time, Davutoglu said Turkey had been looking for ways to help facilitate peace talks. He said that he had scheduled a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Monday to discuss indirect talks with Syria before Netanyahu canceled his trip Sunday.

Davutoglu said that he discussed the raid with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Sunday, and Barak had offered condolences.

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

Tags: Mossad Director US-Israel

Mossad Director Meir Dagan

In a rare public expression of concern, Meir Dagan, head of Israel’s Mossad external security service, warned Tuesday, June 1, that the progressive decline of American strength over the past decade and the perception of the Obama administration as “soft on military options for solving disputes” have cut deep into Israel’s military and diplomatic maneuverability and made it fair game for its enemies. This is reported by debkafile‘s intelligence and political sources.

Dagan presented the Knesset foreign affairs and security committee with this evaluation 24 hours after Israeli Navy boarding parties prevented vessels sailing the Mediterranean from achieving their object of breaking the Gaza blockade. As the UN Security Council’s condemned the loss of life in that raid, the Mossad chief said Barack Obama’s first year as president was a period of “devaluation” for “Israeli and American strategic assets.”

Dagan’s uncharacteristic bluntness was a measure of the anxiety gripping Israel’s security leaders over the slump in US-Israel relations.

He timed his cutting observations for the day Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was to have held talks in White House with President Obama. Although that meeting was cancelled and Netanyahu cut short his trip to return home and deal with the crisis over the flotilla incident, the Mossad Director decided that what he had to say was important enough to be said and aired without delay.

The Obama-Netanyahu meeting had been scheduled as a high point in President Obama’s charm offensive for mending his ties with Israel and American Jewish leaders, Dagan noted. By speaking out now, he hoped they would be warned not to be taken in by Obama’s smiles and understand that his attitude toward the Israeli government had not changed in any fundamental way.

America’s ability to generate situation-changing measures in any part of the world was in decline and this weakness reflects directly and negatively on Israel’s strategic situation. debkafile notes that by this remark, Dagan indirectly disputed the administration’s National Security Strategy report published in Washington five days ago.

This comment also placed him in the middle of the internal political debate in Israel. Whereas opposition factions maintain the peace process between Israel and the Palestinians and other neighbours is stalled by Netanyahu’s allegedly hard-line positions, the Mossad chief puts it in a different perspective: Whatever the prime minister may do and whichever policy he may pursue, in Dagan’s view he is stuck with the endemic weakness stemming from American weakness and the Obama administration’s waning support for Israel.

He warned the lawmakers that the current US administration is in the process of making of Israel “a liability instead of an asset.” The US president, said the Mossad chief, seriously considered forcing Israel to accept a dictated peace formula. He only backed off when he saw that this tactic would not produce a peace accord. But that was “only a tactical retreat, said Dagan.

“Let’s see what steps the Americans take in the future, especially after the midterm congressional elections in November,” he said, because, while an imposed peace is only a last resort and not (the Obama administration’s) preferred option, it is still on the table and a whip he is holding over the heads of both parties.

The Mossad chief concluded by saying: “Such events (a decision to resort to an imposed peace) could careen out of control and lead (US-Israel relations) into extreme situations.”