Friday, April 3, 2009

Life with Jib & Dottie (a new sitcom)

"HONEY! WE'VE GOT COMPANY FOR DINNER TONIGHT!"






What's for dessert?

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

For our common enlightenment.

Source...http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=10450

----------------------------------------------------------
Only Obama can save Iran from Israeli bombs
Richard Beeston – Times Online April 3, 2009

An Israeli colleague was sent on an assignment so secret and sensitive that it was years before he would share the full story with friends.

He was dispatched by Menachem Begin, then the Prime Minister, to European capitals with orders to meet editors, politicians and opinion makers to spread the word that Israel was increasingly concerned about Iraq's nuclear programme and would do anything to stop Saddam Hussein building the bomb. The warnings, intended to prepare Western public opinion, were largely dismissed as sabre-rattling (one editor insisted on discussing a new lavatory system designed on a kibbutz) - until June 1981, when Israeli Air Force F16s bombed the plant to rubble.

A few days ago a chill went down my spine when an articulate and intelligent senior Israeli official made exactly the same argument about Iran's nuclear programme at a briefing in London. He described an Iranian nuclear weapon as an existential threat to the Jewish state, which would defend itself whatever the consequences. These warnings are not new but the political and military circumstances are conspiring to make an Israeli attack on Iran a probability, unless the Middle East experiences dramatic changes in the coming weeks and months.

It is a widely held conclusion among nuclear experts that Iran now possesses enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb. It would still have to be enriched to weapons grade at the centre in Natanz before being made into a warhead. But Iran has mastered the technology and has the raw materials. Building a nuclear bomb is now only a matter of time.

Iran's presidential elections are in June. President Ahmadinejad is expected to be re-elected. Indeed, a Western diplomat in Tehran said that he had not met a single Iranian - even opponents of the Government - who did not believe that he would be returned with a healthy majority. He has vowed repeatedly to press ahead with Iran's nuclear programme and appears to have the full support of Ali Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader.

The combination of the two events is seen in Israel as crossing a red line. Mr Ahmadinejad has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, has hosted a Holocaust-denying conference, and has stepped up arming and funding Hezbollah and Hamas, the two militant groups responsible for rocket attacks against Israel. If he is re-elected for another term with the prospect of building a bomb, Israel would do anything to stop him.

This bleak outlook is made even more sombre by the formation this week of a new Israeli Government under the leadership of Binyamin Netanyahu with Ehud Barak, the Labour leader and junior coalition partner, as the Defence Minister. What is significant is not their political affiliations but their military background. Mr Barak, the most decorated soldier in the Israeli army, once headed Sayeret Matkal, Israel's equivalent of the SAS before becoming the army chief. One soldier serving under him was Mr Netanyahu. Another veteran of this elite unit was Moshe Yaalon, also in the Cabinet. These men have taken part in assassination operations against Palestinian leaders and commanded daring raids deep inside enemy territory. In short, they have the experience and the confidence to plan and execute an attack on Iran. (Emphasis added)

Indeed, Mr Barak was Defence Minister in the previous Government when Israel carried out its latest secret raid in January - on a weapons convoy in Sudan. According to details released this week, Israeli F16 bombers, protected by F15 fighters, attacked targets in Sudan. Pilotless drones then filmed the wreckage, relaying back images which revealed that some vehicles were undamaged. The jets then flew a second sortie. The aircraft, which were refuelled in mid-air, flew 1,750 miles from Israel to Sudan and back. The distance from Israel to Natanz, the uranium enrichment centre in Iran, is 900 miles one way.

A factor in any Israeli calculation will be Iran's air defences, which are far more daunting than Sudan's. Here too there is good reason to believe that Israel may act sooner rather than later. Russia has sold Iran the sophisticated S300 surface-to-air system. Israel would want to launch an attack before these missiles are in place.

These military imperatives might make sense to soldiers, but surely the political cost of a pre-emptive raid - not to mention the risk of plunging the Middle East into another big war - would rule out an attack.

This argument might make sense from Europe but in the Middle East quite another logic is at work. Many Arab states, particularly in the Gulf, are more afraid of a nuclear-armed Iran than Israel is. A military strike that delayed that threat would be welcomed in some Arab capitals. The Israelis know that they would face a huge international outcry. But that happened after the raid on Iraq and many countries later thanked them privately. More recently they were widely attacked after the offensive against Gaza in January, but over time that criticism has died down.

Today the only serious obstacle to this battle is Barack Obama. He has launched a diplomatic offensive aimed at repairing ties with Iran and re-engaging with the regime after 30 years of hostility. There are some signs that Tehran is interested. An Iranian envoy attended a recent meeting on Afghanistan alongside a US delegation. Similar talks have also taken place on Iraq.

But these gestures are largely futile unless Washington can persuade Tehran that it is in its own best interests to shelve its nuclear programme, rejoin the community of nations and co-operate with America. That is a big step for a regime that came to power promising an Islamic revolution and continual struggle with America and Israel.

When Mr Netanyahu travels to Washington next month, Iran is expected to dominate talks. Israel will not attack Iran without tacit approval from America. But time is running out. This could become Mr Obama's biggest challenge.
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6024654.ece

Comment

The above is disinformation of the most insidious sort with its own hidden subtext. For it sets Obama up to take the blame should war erupt between Israel and Iran.

It sets him up in another way too. For by being seen as the “one man” who could prevent war and it would only take a single assassin’s bullet to turn America’s first "Black" president into another Archduke Ferdinand. Ed.

Anonymous said...

very soon the 500 & 1000 ringgit duit kertas reappear !

jc said...

CROOKS

Antares said...

A lot of money is at stake. You can be sure of that!

Walski69 said...

I for one, maintain a state of Apprehension, despite the seemingly positive first move gambit.

BTW, bro, I seek your indulgence to participate in a little poll I've put together - I wanna get as wide a participation as possible. Thanks in advance :-)

pah nur said...

Israeli, by itself, or when running the USA by proxy, can attack if they feel like attacking. There is an invisible government running the visible government, getting them to do whatever the hell they need do to keep whatever agenda they have running on course. As for Obama, it's to test him, as predicted, and expected when someone new enters the White House.

They can always come up with synthetic terror, use that as an excuse to occupy whichever land they feel benefits them the most.

This oligarchy is way beyond Obama. He may be assassinated should he prove to stand in their way. What Obama can do, basically, is to try and get US to a lower dependency towards oil, because weird enough, if a land is without oil, you can go on a genocide fest and these same giants would not bother coming to their aid.

They will do whatever they want to do, and they will kill whoever who gets in the way, JFK for example (it is a well known fact that Israel will not exist should JFK were to be alive). It's a world of espionage. If a country can assassinate their own president (basically the Jews run USA, just like they did Germany and made Germany go to war), it's much easier to do it unto others. And as Obama had avowed, "Israel is our close allies"...

chapchai said...

Did anyone watch "Inside Iraq" on Al Jazeera today? Allegations are still flying around that Israel played a major role in the US/British invasion of Iraq. I'm convinced Obama is not so naive as to be (mis)led by Israeli "intelligence".

aiD_kamikuP said...

A picture paints a thousand words much like this silent triad of photos depict the perfect trilogy of devil re-incarnate of white fox, Mahatahi and Najib-Alat-antu-ya.

donplaypuks® said...

a cabal of thieves dining and wining iwth our money will soon suffer from gross constipation and indigestion!

backStreetGluttons said...

It seems our local landscape as far away as in Pertak is getting more and more threatening , positioned and poised deadly as low profile filty rich crooks previously maligned by Bodowi are now re-appearing in droves starting with the desserts you have just unleashed , in the armpits of red lips and cold blooded bloated murderer.

What can we do bruder , except to just gawk and stare , like empty vessels ?

jc said...

OECD names and shames tax havens

Malaysia is one of the four countries on the blacklist
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has published its blacklist of non-cooperative tax havens.

Costa Rica, Malaysia, and the Philippines are the countries listed as not having agreed to tax standards.

Uruguay had originally been listed too, but later protested that it had been wrongly included.

After listening to its arguments the OECD said it was happy the country had agreed to its tax transparency rules.

The list is part of efforts agreed at the G20 summit to clamp down on havens.

There is also a list of 38 places that have agreed to improve standards but not yet done so, such as Gibraltar, Liechtenstein, Andorra and San Marino.

'Willing to co-operate'

On Thursday, G20 leaders agreed to take sanctions against tax havens using the OECD list as its basis.

In their communique, they agreed, "to take action against non-cooperative jurisdictions, including tax havens".

"We stand ready to deploy sanctions to protect our public finances and financial systems. The era of banking secrecy is over."

Uruguay had objected to its inclusion on the list, published earlier on Friday.

The South American country sent a letter to Angel Gurria, secretary-general of the OECD, from its finance minister Alvaro GarcĂ­a.

He informed the OECD that Uruguay had formally endorsed the body's standards on transparency and exchange of information.

"I am pleased that Uruguay joins a growing number of nations willing to co-operate in fighting tax evasion and other tax abuses," said Mr Gurria.

Pressure

Angel Gurria, secretary general of the OECD, said that the G20 summit had helped to focus minds on the issue of tax havens.

There were frosty negotiations between France and China over the inclusion of Macau

Paul Mason, BBC Two Newsnight economics editor


The tax haven that vanished

"We've had more progress in the last two weeks on this matter than we've had in the last 10 or 12 years," he told the BBC.

He added that the progress had come despite the leaders not specifying what sanctions they would take.

"[Non-cooperating countries] will move because they know the question of sanctions, however ill-defined that was, is going to affect them somehow."

The Philippines is already reported to be taking steps to remove itself from the blacklist.

"The Philippine government would take the necessary steps to ensure we meet their expectations," Trade Secretary Peter Favila told the Associated Press news agency.

"It is really up to us to prove them wrong."

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak said that his country should not be on the blacklist at all.

"We should not be in that category as, in practice, we have been committed to OECD requirements," he said in a statement.

Antares said...

I have gazed into the crystal ball and it tells me Dr M will develop an acute aneurism but will survive it. However, he will NOT survive prolonged exposure to anwarism.