238 Hamas to EU: Put Israel on terrorism list-

Hamas to EU: Put Israel on terrorism list

(1) Dubai Passport/identity theft costs Israel votes in UN resolution on Gaza war crimes
(2) Dubai: "Holocaust mentors accompanied Mossad assassins to motivate them" - Gilad Atzmon
(3) Hamas to EU: Put Israel on terrorism list
(4) Israeli FM sidesteps questions on Hamas killing
(5) Interpol issues Red Notices for Mossad assassins
(6) Liberal Richard Cohen urges Obama to act "Crazy" towards Iran
(7) Iran and the crazy factor - Richard Cohen
(8) China accuses US of online warfare in Iran, using YouTube, Facebook & Twitter
(9) Elie Wiesel a super-hawk on Iran - ARNO J. MAYER
(10) Hillary dodged question about Israel's nukes
(11) Ecuador punished for befriending Iran

(1) Dubai Passport/identity theft costs Israel votes in UN resolution on Gaza war crimes

From: Sadanand, Nanjundiah (Physics Earth Sciences) <sadanand@mail.ccsu.edu> Date: 02.03.2010 05:21 PM
Subject: Are Israel's friends "seeing the light"? Does Israel care, as long as US provides arms without question?

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/israel-has-lost-friends-20100228-pb7p.html.

"Israel has lost friends"…Sydney Morning Herald, March 1, 2010

By Daniel Flitton

This vote is clearly an act of retaliation by Australia - and by Britain, France and Germany. Israel has lost friends thanks to the sordid affair in Dubai concerning fake passports and murder, and the stink will hang in the air a good while yet.

Australia has made a calculated switch away from backing Israel's complaints about bias in the United Nations system. Don't be fooled. There are plenty of gripes about how Israel is unfairly targeted in the UN, but Tel Aviv takes these votes seriously and lobbies hard to win countries to its side.

Now Israel has lost key supporters. In New York on Friday night, Australia abstained from a resolution calling for further investigation of the 2009 Gaza conflict and war crimes allegations. Not so long ago Australia was one of 17 countries to join Israel to vote against a similar resolution. The message is clear.

Britain and France went further. Having abstained in the vote last November, on Friday both backed the need for further investigations. Germany switched along the same lines as Australia, while Ireland - the other country caught in the visa scandal - has voted for investigation both times.

The fact is the war crimes questions arising from Gaza are separate from the passport affair and Australia should vote consistently. But the UN is first and foremost a venue for power politics.

This can take many forms, and subtle changes to behaviour can send a strong message.

Australia has demanded Israel co-operate with an inquiry to determine how three Australian passports ended up in the hands of an apparent Mossad hit squad. But if Israel continues to hide behind a policy of ''never confirm or deny'', Australia has little choice but to seek alternative ways to apply pressure for co-operation. For all the talk of close ties between the two countries, Australia has little other leverage.

More revelations are to come from this Dubai affair. The local authorities claim more suspects will soon be identified and are demanding the countries caught up in the scandal do more than condemn the forgery of their passports but help catch the killers. Australia will also feel the pressure to take strong action in the weeks ahead.

Daniel Flitton is The Age's diplomatic editor.

(2) Dubai: "Holocaust mentors accompanied Mossad assassins to motivate them" - Gilad Atzmon

From: Erooth Mohamed <ekunhan@gmail.com> Date: 02.03.2010 03:34 PM From: Gilad Atzmon <gilad@gilad.co.uk> Subject: Jews and their Pillows....

Why it takes so many Mossad agents to kill a Palestinian with a Pillow? by Gilad Atzmon

Monday, March 1, 2010

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/why-it-takes-so-many-mossad-agents-to-kill-a-palestinian-wit.html

While in Britain, France, USA and Argentina the Mossad enjoys the support of thousands of local Sayanim, Jews who are happy to betray their neighbours for their beloved Jewish state, when operating in Arab countries the Mossad has to schlep its very many assassins and their assistants using different fraudulent methods.

Yet one may wonder why does it take 26 Mossad agents to carry out a single murder of an unarmed Palestinian freedom fighter with a pillow*. I will try to throw some light on the puzzling question.

The Mossad is not just an ordinary intelligence agency run by boring gentiles. It is actually run by Chosen people and it is there to serve the interests of the Jewish state and the Jewish national project. In recent days we learned that more than two dozen Mossad agents have been identified so far by the Dubai police. One would expect that with such a varied and extended collective of Jewish murderers operating in an hostile Arab country at least one combatant Rabbi is needed just to keep the Kosher regulations, maintaining an open line with God and sustaining a revengeful Jewish spirit.

As much as food in Dubai is known to be amazingly delicious, not many kosher delicatessens are currently operating downtown. Hence, we also need a Jewishly trained expert that would purchase the fish for the gefilte and the chicken for the soup. We would need at least one chef who knows how to transform chicken and water into Jewish Power (chicken soup). You have to remember that from a Jewish perspective, food is of the essence. Unlike animals who kill only when they need to eat or are detecting an imminent danger, the Israeli kills for "ulterior motives" (democracy, pluralism, war 'against terror' etc') and then prefers to do it when their belly is full.

Between the culinary concerns and the Kosher diet regulations we already allocated 3 members of the team. Still 23 potential assassins are more than enough for just one single kill.

But there are more facts to take into account. Bearing in mind the recent revelations about some Mossad members' mental instability, it is more than likely that a Psychiatrist, a Freudian analyst, a psychiatric paramedic and a nurse were needed to assist the Jewish lethal heroes 'before and after'. This indeed brings our team to just 19 potential assassins.

As we learn from the press, 6 of the Mossad agents were women. This would mean that we need some beauty experts. A hairdresser who specialises in 'curly situations'. We would also need a Jewish Cosmetic consultant, and one who knows about manicure and pedicure. One who can transform the Jewish female nail into a Zionist lethal sword (just in case a technical pillow failure occurs). We also need a wig specialist, one who knows how to transform a boy from Tel Aviv into a lad from Essex. The 'J beauty specialists' reduce our team of assassins to 17.

But we are not finished yet, as we learn from the press. Our Mossad killers were rather enthusiastic about tennis. Clearly they wouldn't trust an Arab or Jihady referee, they must have brought their own. They probably needed a Kosher Israeli tennis referee and a few athletic settlers who run after their balls. Let us assume that we need 2-3 ball runners and one referee, this would bring our potential assassin team to just 14.

According to The Times, the Holocaust play a major role in Mossad's philosophy. "We should be strong, use our brain, and defend ourselves so that the Holocaust will never be repeated", says Meir Dagan the Mossad 's current chief. As it happens, the Mossad is killing in the name of the Jewish past. It is more than likely that the Mossad schleped to Dubai some of its best Holocaust priests, those who remind the spies why should they execute and why they should depart from the human family. Considering the six figure narrative, it would be reasonable to assume that the Mossad sent to Dubai at least six Holocaust mentors: one for each million.

However, as we know, the Nazi Holocaust is just one event among countless other Judeocides. 'Never to Forgive Never to Forget' is apparently the prospect of Jewish future. All together we can count 9 or 10 Jewish Judeocide priests to include the 19th century East European Pogroms, the Inquisition, Amalek and so on. This would bring down our list of potential hit men to just 5.

Yet as much as nationalist Jews and their spiritual leaders vow 'never to forget' and always to remember, there are some things they really insist to overlook, push aside or dismiss. For instance, they seem to fail to grasp the real meaning of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict known as the Goldstone report. They insist to dismiss Shlomo Sand's reading of their history as a bundle of invented phatasmic tales on the verge of total fallacy. They insist to turn a blind eye to the fact that AIPAC, AJC, ADL, LFI and CFI dispatches are all lobbying for racist expansionist ideology (Zionism) in our midst. With British Foreign Secretary David Miliband being listed as an "Israeli Hasbara (propaganda) Author" and Zionists preaching for interventionist wars in the Media, with Bernie Madoff teaching us about Ponzi schemes and Alan Greenspan who brought on us the biggest financial meltdown ever. We need some Jewish specialists who can indoctrinate Mossad agents into total blindness and complete amnesia. I would guess that with Wolfowitz, Miliband, Goldstone, Abe Foxman, Greenspan, Madoff, Olmert, Livni Sharon, Peres and too many more, we may need just more than 5 experts to convince the Mossad's hit-squad that the Jewish cause is truly kosher.

As we can see, we already counted 26 necessary assistants to murder without even mentioning a single Mossad pillow operator. As we see, it takes far more than just 26 Mossad agents to murder an unarmed Palestinian. I guess that in the coming days the Dubai police will bring up many more photos of Israelis in wigs.

I must admit that with Israel around, life is always full of surprises. What are we going to do when it is gone?

(3) Hamas to EU: Put Israel on terrorism list
February 22, 2010

http://jta.org/news/article/2010/02/22/1010741/hamas-to-eu-put-israel-on-terrorism-list

JERUSALEM (JTA) -- Hamas asked the European Union to include Israel on a list of countries that support terrorism.

"We urge the EU to include the Zionist entity on the list of countries that support terrorism, as it represents a threat to international peace," Hamas said in a statement released Monday.

Hamas has accused Israel of being responsible for last month's assassination of a Hamas commander, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, in a Dubai hotel.

The United States and the European Union consider Hamas a terrorist organization.

European Union ministers met Monday in Brussels.

(4) Israeli FM sidesteps questions on Hamas killing

By ROBERT WIELAARD

The Associated Press - Monday, February 22, 2010

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022202379.html

BRUSSELS -- Israel's foreign minister sidestepped questions at EU headquarters Monday about his country's alleged role in last week's assassination of a top Palestinian Hamas operative, officials said.

Avigdor Lieberman also avoided discussing the falsified European Union passports believed to have been used by the killers, despite pressure for answers in one-on-one meetings with EU foreign ministers and the bloc's foreign affairs chief, Catherine Ashton.

"There's not been an acknowledgment on these issues," Ashton said. She planned also to have dinner Monday with Lieberman.  ...

(5) Interpol issues Red Notices for Mossad assassins

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world-news/interpol-issues-red-notices-in-hamas-leader-killing_100322602.html

Interpol issues ‘Red Notices’ in Hamas leader killing

February 19th, 2010 - 3:56 am ICT by IANS   -

Paris, Feb 19 (DPA) The international police agency Interpol said Thursday it has issued “Red Notices” for 11 individuals charged by UAE authorities in the killing of Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai Jan 19.
An Interpol Red Notice is not an international arrest warrant, the agency says. Rather, it targets people wanted by national jurisdictions, and enables Interpol to assist in identifying and locating the suspects with a view to their arrest and extradition.

Interpol said that the 11 people cited “have stolen the identities of real people,” and that the Red Notices specify that the names used to commit murder were aliases. On its web site, it has made public their photos and the false names.

Police in Dubai believe the 11 suspects were members of Israel’s intelligence agency Mossad.

(6) Liberal Richard Cohen urges Obama to act "Crazy" towards Iran

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 01.03.2010 10:15 AM

Liberal Richard Cohen Advocates Craziness in an Israel First War Policy

February 28th, 2010 | Author: Patriot

Sunday, February 28, 2010 6:57 AM
From: "Stephen Sniegoski"

http://america-hijacked.com/2010/02/28/liberal-richard-cohen-advocates-craziness-in-an-israel-first-war-policy/

Friends,

While we are explicitly told by anti-war commentators such as Juan Cole that the only type of American Jews pushing for war on Iran are right-wing ones, it is apparent that Jewish liberals such as Richard Cohen are also in the pro-war camp. (See: http://tinyurl.com/JuanColeonIsraelLobby) Now Cohen, just like a number of rightist neocons, does not directly call for an attack on Iran, but rather advocates a policy that certainly would lead in that direction. Specifically, he says that it is time for Obama to start acting "crazy" toward Iran because of the alleged failure of diplomacy.

(Iran and the Crazy Factor, Washington Post, February 23, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022203530.html)

Such a recommendation of craziness is predicated on Cohen's belief that Ahmadinejad and the Iranian leadership in general are crazy and that the only way to fight crazy people is by likewise acting crazy: "fight crazy with crazy." Cohen writes: "I have no idea whether Ahmadinejad merely acts crazy or is crazy. I do know, though, that Iran seems intent on getting nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. I also know that nothing the United States and its allies have done has dissuaded Ahmadinejad (or the mullahs or the Revolutionary Guard Corps) from his goal. It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy. The way things are going, it would be crazy not to."

It is rather odd that Cohen would pick Nixon's advocacy of madness as a model for emulation, since Nixon, and especially his bellicosity, were hardly admired by liberals such as Cohen during his presidency. Moreover, Cohen acknowledges that Nixon's crazy strategy "while cunning, didn't work on the North Vietnamese." Desiring the adoption of a previously failed strategy is hard to fathom.

Furthermore, Nixon's rationale for acting crazy would not seem to apply in the milieu depicted by Cohen. Nixon actually predicated his madman strategy on the rationality of his adversaries. The rational person, presumably, would make some concessions to the madman to avoid destruction. However, Cohen claims that the Iranians are irrational. There is no reason to think that acting crazy would cause them to turn rational, but rather that it would cause them to act out their craziness, which in the particular situation that exists in the Middle East today would mean an all-out war. To try to put Cohen's argument in a rational context, this must mean that he sees a war with Iran at the current time to be preferable to one in the future when Iran would have nuclear weapons and which would likely involve Israel.

The reasons Cohen gives for taking a "crazy" stance toward Iran have little to do with any threat Iran poses to the United States, but actually seem to revolve around Israel and Jews. Cohen cites Ahmadinejad's "Holocaust denial" and his call for Zionism to be "wiped out." Cohen acknowledges that these words might have nothing to do with the launching of war-"On the face of it, these statements could be nothing more than the ranting of a demagogue intent on appeasing the mob." But then he points out that Israel, having experienced Hitler's anti-Semitic words leading to the Holocaust, would naturally think otherwise. "Israel, of all countries," he asserts, "has little faith in the rationality of mankind. It simply knows better. So the question of whether Ahmadinejad is playing the madman or really is a madman is not an academic exercise. It has a real and frightening immediacy that too often, in too many precincts, gets belittled as a form of paranoia."

So it might be understandable for Israel to be terrified of a nuclear Iran, at least according to Cohen, but what about a threat to the United States? "An Iranian bomb," Cohen contends, "is not a matter that concerns only Israel. It would upend the balance of power throughout the Middle East and encourage radical/terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas to ratchet up their war against Israel. Other Middle East nations, not content to rely on an American nuclear umbrella, would seek their own bombs. An unstable region would go nuclear." It is telling that even in purportedly dealing with threats to countries other than Israel, Cohen almost immediately gets back to threats to Israel by writing that a nuclear Iran would "encourage radical/terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas to ratchet up their war against Israel." For Cohen, Israel's safety is certainly on his mind, first and foremost.

But regarding the US, the dangers presumably consist of countries in the unstable Middle East obtaining nuclear weapons. These developments, while undesirable, are hardly dire threats to American national security. And we are only dealing with the chance of Iran developing actual nuclear weapons, though it is more likely that it will develop nuclear capability. And in the most extreme case with all major countries in the Middle East obtaining nuclear weapons, it is not even clear whether such a development would lead to a terrible war or whether it might actually enhance regional stability. Certainly, the existence of nuclear weapons served to prevent a major war between the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. And the possession of nuclear weapons have not caused India and Pakistan to be more aggressive toward each other. Of course, the loss of its nuclear monopoly would weaken Israel's position in the Middle East.

What Cohen does not even make an attempt to show is that in regard to American security the danger of not attacking Iran outweighs the terrible impact of a war in the Middle East, which would be a likely result from his recommendation that Obama act crazy. It would seem to be a general consensus that a war on Iran at the present time would have terrible consequences for the already-battered world economy, which would certainly affect the US. It should be pointed out that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Michael Mullen, reflecting what has been the consensus view of the American military leadership, has expressed strong opposition to any military strike on Iran and desires the continuation of peaceful diplomacy. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/dreyfuss/513886/admiral_mullen_no_attack_on_iran

In sum, it would appear that the liberal Richard Cohen does not differ substantially from his co-religionists on the Right in his militant position toward Iran. And there is nothing particularly new about this. Cohen had supported the war on Iraq and only later recanted, after the war had become unpopular, but included Israel in his explanation for his earlier pro-war position: "Saddam Hussein was a beast who had twice invaded his neighbors, had killed his own people with abandon and posed a threat – and not just a theoretical one – to Israel." ("The Lingo Of Vietnam," Washington Post, November 21, 2006, p. A-27) It would seem therefore that the safety of Israel always looms very large in the minds of even liberal Jews.

Transparent Cabal Website: http://home.comcast.net/~transparentcabal/

Amazon listing of The Transparent Cabal: http://tiny.cc/zNV06

Best, Stephen Sniegoski

(7) Iran and the crazy factor - Richard Cohen

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/22/AR2010022203 530.html

Washington Post

Iran and the crazy factor

By Richard Cohen Tuesday, February 23, 2010; A19

A question relating to Iran's suspected nuclear weapons program: Is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad crazy like Adolf Hitler, or is he crazy like, of all people, Richard Nixon?

Nixon had a term for his own sort of craziness: "I call it the Madman Theory, Bob," he said to his aide H.R. "Bob" Haldeman during the 1968 presidential campaign. Nixon was talking about how he would deal with the Vietnam War. "I want the North Vietnamese to believe I've reached the point where I might do anything to stop the war. We'll just slip the word to them that, ‘For God's sake, you know Nixon is obsessed about communism. We can't restrain him when he's angry — and he has his hand on the nuclear button.'" The strategy, while cunning, didn't work on the North Vietnamese. Maybe they were crazier than Nixon.

Ahmadinejad is some version of crazy, too. His denial of the Holocaust is either proof of a drooling sort of insanity or a kind of Nixonian craziness designed to keep enemies and adversaries off balance: What will this guy do next?

In tandem with his Holocaust denial, Ahmadinejad has repeatedly urged the destruction of Israel. While some experts differ on the precise translations of his words, his general goal is clear. What's not clear, though, is whether he is expressing a wish or making a vow: "The Zionist regime will be wiped out." "The Zionist regime is on its way out." "This regime's days are numbered." "Thanks to God, your wish will soon be realized, and this germ of corruption will be wiped off the face of the world." I could go on and on as, in fact, Ahmadinejad has.

On the face of it, these statements could be nothing more than the ranting of a demagogue intent on appeasing the mob. After all, Ahmadinejad has to know that any attempt to convert his rhetoric into action would be met by force. Israel is a nuclear power, and it will not go down without a fight. The Iranians cannot be that crazy. They are, in a Nixonian way, merely trying to impress. Maybe.

But the belief that the world operates rationally is itself irrational. The example of Hitler both instructs and warns. The Nazi leader was not just an anti-Semite who actually believed his insane theories; he also made decisions that were in themselves crazy. For example, why did he declare war on the United States after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor? Why did he invade the Soviet Union before he had defeated Britain? In both cases, he had his reasons. And in both cases, his reasons were crazy.

Israel, of all countries, has little faith in the rationality of mankind. It simply knows better. So the question of whether Ahmadinejad is playing the madman or really is a madman is not an academic exercise. It has a real and frightening immediacy that too often, in too many precincts, gets belittled as a form of paranoia. For instance, when Israeli leaders warn that they might take preemptive action against Iran — say, an attempt to bomb its nuclear facilities as they did in Iraq in 1981 — it is dismissed as irresponsible saber-rattling. Former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski even suggested that if Israel tried such a thing, the United States might have to back it down with force. The Brzezinski Doctrine is refreshing in its perverse boldness: We shoot our friends to defend our enemies.

An Iranian bomb is not a matter that concerns only Israel. It would upend the balance of power throughout the Middle East and encourage radical/terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas to ratchet up their war against Israel. Other Middle East nations, not content to rely on an American nuclear umbrella, would seek their own bombs. An unstable region would go nuclear. (It speaks volumes about Middle Eastern reality and hypocrisy that Egypt serenely lives with an Israeli bomb but breaks out in diplomatic hives at the prospect of an Iranian one.) Have a good night's sleep.

I have no idea whether Ahmadinejad merely acts crazy or is crazy. I do know, though, that Iran seems intent on getting nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. I also know that nothing the United States and its allies have done has dissuaded Ahmadinejad (or the mullahs or the Revolutionary Guard Corps) from his goal. It may be time for Barack Obama, ever the soul of moderation, to borrow a tactic from Richard Nixon and fight crazy with crazy. The way things are going, it would be crazy not to.

(8) China accuses US of online warfare in Iran, using YouTube, Facebook & Twitter

From: WVNS <ummyakoub@yahoo.com> Date: 28.02.2010 07:50 PM

China accuses US of online warfare in Iran

Iran election unrest an example of US 'naked political scheming' behind free speech facade, says Communist party editorial
 
Tania Branigan in Beijing and agencies

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/24/china-us-iran-online-warfare

The United States used "online warfare" to stir up unrest in Iran after last year's elections, the Chinese Communist party newspaper claimed today, hitting back at Hillary Clinton's speech last week about internet freedom.

An editorial in the People's Daily accused the US of launching a "hacker brigade" and said it had used social media such as Twitter to spread rumours and create trouble.

"Behind what America calls free speech is naked political scheming. How did the unrest after the Iranian election come about?" said the editorial, signed by Wang Xiaoyang. "It was because online warfare launched by America, via YouTube video and Twitter microblogging, spread rumours, created splits, stirred up and sowed discord between the followers of conservative reformist factions."

Washington said at the time of the unrest that it had asked Twitter, which was embraced by Iranian anti-government protesters, to remain open. Several social media sites, including YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, have been blocked in China in the last year.

The editorial asked rhetorically whether obscenity or activities promoting terrorism would be allowed on the net in the US. "We're afraid that in the eyes of American politicians, only information controlled by America is free information, only news acknowledged by America is free news, only speech approved by America is free speech, and only information flow that suits American interests is free information flow," it added.

It attacked the decision to cut off of Microsoft's instant messaging services to nations covered by US sanctions, including Cuba, Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea, as violating America's stated desire for free information flow. Washington later said that such services fostered democracy and encouraged their restoration.

China initially gave a low-key response to Google's announcement that it was no longer willing to censor google.cn. The internet giant said it had reached its decision following a Chinese-originated cyber attack targeting the email accounts of human rights activists, and in light of increasing online censorship.

Clinton's direct challenge to China, in a speech that had echoes of the cold war with its references to the Berlin wall and an "information curtain", led Beijing to warn that US criticism could damage bilateral relations. Clinton called on China to hold a full and open investigation into the December attack on Google.

In an interview carried by several Chinese newspapers today, Zhou Yonglin, deputy operations director of the national computer network emergency response technical team, said: "Everyone with technical knowledge of computers knows that just because a hacker used an IP address in China, the attack was not necessarily launched by a Chinese hacker."

US diplomats sought to reach out to the Chinese public by briefing bloggers in China on Friday. They held a similar meeting during Barack Obama's visit in November.

(9) Elie Wiesel a super-hawk on Iran - ARNO J. MAYER

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 14.02.2010 01:08 PM

Wiesel and the "Iranian Problem"

The Treason of the Nobels

By ARNO J. MAYER

February 12-14, 2010

http://www.counterpunch.org/mayer02122010.html

Elie Wiesel modestly calls his benevolent foundation the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity. Under its flag he has gathered the signatures of 43 Nobel laureates in support of the resistance inside Iran (New York Times, February 7, 2010, p. 19). Although Wiesel was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace (1986), his appeal is anything but a call for a peaceful and negotiated resolution of the "Iranian problem" in West Asia.

May I remind the Nobel laureates who have signed this appeal of one of Jean-Paul Sartre's main reasons for voluntarily declining the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1964: "It is not the same thing if I sign Jean-Paul Sartre or if I sign Jean-Paul Sartre, Nobel Prize winner. A writer must refuse to allow himself to be transformed into an institution, even if it takes place in the most honorable form."

Apart from his support for its dissidents Wiesel is a long-standing super-hawk on Iran, which he confirmed immediately following the publication of his appeal. In a quasi-postscript in the form of an interview he avowed that he would not shed a tear "if he heard that Ahmadinejad was assassinated" and, calling him "a pathological danger to world peace," he averred that Iran's President "intends to destroy Israel and bring disaster to the entire world." Wiesel also seized the occasion to blast the Goldstone Report as "a crime against the Jewish people."

Concerning Iran Wiesel is patently in complete harmony with Shimon Peres, the hard-line President of Israel who incongruously shared a Nobel Peace Prize with Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat (1994).

We can only hope (against hope?) that President Barack Obama, the latest Nobel Peace Laureate, will turn out to merit the honor conferred on him prematurely (which in the spirit of Sartre he might have considered refusing). America's Imperial President could help rehabilitate the letter and spirit of Alfred Nobel's wish that the yearly prize reward "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Arno J Mayer is emeritus professor of history at Princeton University. He is the author of The Furies: Violence and Terror in the French and Russian Revolutions.and Plowshares Into Swords: From Zionism to Israel (Verso).

(10) Hillary dodged question about Israel's nukes

From: ReporterNotebook <RePorterNoteBook@Gmail.com> Date: 23.02.2010 04:34 PM

Clinton avoided nuke question - student

Herald-Sun, Melbourne

AFP | February 22, 2010

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/clinton-avoided-nuke-question-student/story-e6frf7jx-1225832790510

A SAUDI student blasted US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for skirting her question on Israel's nuclear arsenal during a "town hall'' meeting at a Jeddah college.

"I did not get a straight answer,'' Mariyam Alavi said in a letter published in Arab News on her question to the top US diplomat last Tuesday. "My question was simple and direct enough,'' she wrote, but Ms Clinton's response "was very unsatisfying.''

Alavi, a 12th grader at the International Indian School in Jeddah, attended the meeting at the elite Dar al-Hekma College with six classmates. She had asked Ms Clinton about Washington's stance on the existence of nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

If the Americans "so vehemently oppose Iran's nuclear programme,'' she had asked, "then why isn't the US asking Israel to give up their nuclear weapons?''

Ms Clinton gave a lengthy answer detailing the US case against Iran, but did not mention Israel. She did, however, say that "we want not only a world free of nuclear weapons, we want a Middle East free of nuclear weapons, including everyone.''

Alavi's Arab News letter assailed US "hypocrisy'' over the issue, reflecting a widely held sentiment in in the region.

"Clinton said that the United States, under the able leadership of President Barack Obama, was trying to repair and strengthen its ties with the Muslim world.

"It is high time she realised it couldn't be done without answering the questions uppermost in the minds of the Middle East people.''

Alavi said she had been nervous about asking such a "politically provocative question'' but was then encouraged by strong applause from the audience when she addressed Ms Clinton.

Ms Clinton had been on a three-day trip to Qatar and Saudi Arabia to discuss, among other things, how to confront Iran's alleged programme to develop nuclear weapons.

(11) Ecuador punished for befriending Iran

From: WVNS <ummyakoub@yahoo.com> Date: 25.02.2010 10:04 AM

Press TV - Monday, February 22, 2010

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=119189&sectionid=351020706

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa says his country was added to a list of states accused of lagging in the campaign against money laundering to punish it for its ties with Iran.

"This decision has nothing to do with the fight against money laundering, or the fight against the funding of terrorism… It has to do with that we have an embassy in Iran," Correa said in the highland town of Sangolqui outside Quito on Saturday.

"So because we have misbehaved. They are giving us a smack so we don't misbehave," he added, describing the move as a "hypocritical punishment."

"Instead of revising themselves, they condemn us. There is no money laundering here my friends. There is no terrorism, and no funding of terrorism. Imagine if he had money to fund terrorism, I wish I had money to build all the schools that I want to build," he said.

The Paris-based Financial Action Task Force, or FATF, named Ecuador and Iran on a list of states that it says are failing to comply with international regulations against money laundering and financing terrorism.

However, Correa said that Ecuador's two dozen banks had perfectly adequate legislation to protect against laundering and terrorism financing and dismissed the report as "a huge lie."

Under Correa's administration, Ecuador has strengthened diplomatic and commercial ties with Iran, which has opened an embassy in Quito.
In recent years, Iran has looked to increase its cooperation with Latin American states such as Ecuador, to the chagrin of Washington.

Citing a 2009 agreement between Ecuador's Central Bank and some Iranian financial institutions, Ecuador's private bank association said on Friday that it believed the Iran factor was behind the country's inclusion on the FATF list.