Israel Daily News Stream 03/27/2012
March 27, 2012 18:49 by Pesach Benson
Iranian Atomic Urgency
• An absolutely fascinating correction in The Guardian . Who knew about this twist to the Osirak precedent?
A commentary described Israel’s 1981 attack on the Osirak nuclear site in Iraq as the world’s first air strike on a nuclear facility. It was the first successful strike. The previous year, the Iranian air force had tried to destroy Osirak (Bomb Iran and it will surely decide to pursue nuclear arms, 26 March, page 20).
The 1981 attack on Osirak
Arab Spring Winter
• Worth reading: Michael Ignatieff gets into Bashar Assad’s parallel universe.
• If this Times of London report (paywall) is credible, a lot of Syrian higher-ups are trying to negotiate safe passage out of the country and Bashar Assad’s orbit, “thus undermining the authority of his regime.”
Those involved include army chiefs, commanders in the Republican Guard and senior officials in the presidential palace. Several have been supplying vital information to the opposition for months.
But efforts to bring the men out have become bogged down as they wait for the right moment to flee. Many have sought to negotiate terms, particularly for their families.
• Other Syria headlines:
Rest O’ the Roundup
• Common sense prevails at a Baltimore radio station:
Journalist fired for calling Israeli occupation brutal
• The US Supreme Court sent the case of Zivotofsky vs. Clinton back to the lower court. That’s good news for the legal effort to get Menachem Zivotofsky’s US passport to list his place of birth as “Jerusalem, Israel.” AP writes:
The justices, on an 8-1 judgment, overturned a lower court ruling that said the judiciary could not get involved in a political fight mixing Middle Eastern politics with a dispute between Congress and the president.
“The courts are fully capable of determining whether this statute may be given effect, or instead must be struck down in light of authority conferred on the executive by the Constitution,” said Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion.
More legal-beagle links at the SCOTUS blog.
• Israel’s preparing for a visit by Barack Obama Prince Charles Vladimir Putin in June.
• Mohammed Merah sent Al Jazeera a memory stick with footage of his murder spree. Al Jazeera said it’s not going to broadcast the video, according to AP.
Tarrouche said the images appear to have been taken from the point of view of the killer, perhaps from a camera hung around his neck. He said they were a bit shaky but of a high technical quality.
The video had clearly been manipulated after the fact, according to Tarrouche, with religious songs and recitations of Quranic verses laid over the footage.
“You can hear gunshots at the moment of the killings. You can hear the voice of this person who has committed these assassinations. You can hear also the cries of the victims, and the voices were distorted,” Tarrouche said.
• Israel HaYom: Stunned silence at J Street’s conference as deputy ambassador Baruch Binah scolded the organization to stand by Israel.
• Worth reading: What the Daily Show Could Teach Journalism Students
What blew my mind: Some comedy writers are better read than many college journalists.
(Image of Osirak via Israel Air Force, Supreme Court via Flickr/yeowatzup)
For more, see yesterday’s Israel Daily News Stream.
Clicking “Unsubscribe instantly” on your mailing will remove you from the Israel Daily News Stream list, but not from your regular HonestReporting emails.
Comfort Douche | Israellycool
9:10 pm
Mar 27, 2012
[...] to think of it, maybe he’s referring to this. Or is it this?Ok, you get the point (hat tip: Honest Reporting). About the Author An Australian immigrant to Israel, Aussie Dave has been blogging since early [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
BUTSeriously
9:25 am
Mar 28, 2012
Why is the UN allowing the term OCCUPIED TERRITORY – which law is this based on? At best it is DISPUTED TERRITORY, at worst, it is the result of the corruption of the Balfour for 30 barrels of oil: the greatest Post-W.W.II crime of all.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Paul Tenenbaum
11:57 pm
Mar 28, 2012
Israel has been using the term: occupied territory. They did.
If you refer to the 1922 agreement, it is a bit late.
Did you mean 30 pieces of silver???? Do you know what the worst post WWII crime is: Rwanda!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
BUTSeriously
11:42 am
Mar 29, 2012
Without disrespect to the Rwanda tragedy, the analogy is flawed. The corruption of the Balfour was, not just morally wrong, it was then and now legally wrong. Here’s the proof Britain engaged in a genocidal aspiration of the Jews – and continues this premise today with immunity and impudence – with no fear of heaven or any Christian yet taking the matter to task..
1. The Balfour Mandate corruption was perpetrated under extreme duress on the heels of W.W.II when the Jews were totally helpless, and after Britain accepted the Mandate as legal treaty. A Mandate is not negotiable under such terms. The duress factor makes Britain’s actions illegal.
Of course, it was also a moral atrocity:
2. The term 2-state compromise for carving off almost “80%’ of a minuscule land begs the question what % is NOT a compromise? Any clues for us?
3. There was never a need for creating Jordan – not after 22 vast & huge Islamic states which never existed before were settled by Britain – a gross misuse by Britain’s caretaker role. These regimes are arguably illegal: unlike with Israel which was re-established with all nations voting at the UN, none voted for any of the regime states, all were created in secret, handed to one Islamic family with no conditions for human rights of others attached, and pushing under the bus a host of nations and peoples that predate both Islam and the Arab race. Clearly, Britain played a non-virtual Judas for 30 barrels of oil, a vindication of Britain’s own biblical doctrines impacting here.
4. CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. Britain’s White Paper barred Jewish refugees fleeing Europe from even the 20% swamp and desert left. Clearly, this was aspiring only of genocide. Shiploads of Jews were sent back to Germany’s camps. Britain went on to instigate all countries to slam their doors to Jewish immigration, including countries like Australia, N.Z., Canada.
5. SERIAL 2-STATE DEMANDS IN THE SAME LAND = GENOCIDE.
Read again Britain’s pompous phony wordage:
“IT WILL BE A HISTORIC COMPROMISE TO GRANT TWO STATES IN PALESTINE – ONE FOR THE JEWS AND ONE FOR THE ARABS” – Churchill.
Noting the above division which created Jordan was never required and an abuse of the agreed Balfour Mandate, Britain is now obsessed with a 3-state while shamelessly calling it a 2-state. Is it a problem of math? Note also the term ARAB is used by Britain – not Palestinians. Guess why!
5. The Re-Transfer of the name Palestinian after 2000 years of exclusive reference to Jews, then from Jews on to those openly panting for another Holocaust is not a confusing agenda. Its like calling the Chinese the real Norwegians, only more formidable. It makes the Nazis more honest than the Brits. This while the main Jewish media, The Jerusalem Post, was called the Palestinian Post under Britain’s nose and when the Arab Muslims hated this name as they do Zionists today before Arafat emerged. Britain does not have a problem with history: she was in the front lines as mercenaries under Rome – destroying Jerusalem, and a witness the name Palestinian was applied to Judea – not an Islamic or Arab land.
You are quite wrong for the analogy of Rwanda. The world was taken by surprise and shock of this event and responded to it with outrage, although belatedly. Not so with what is occurring with Israel!?
It is a pity that Britain, one of the great nations of the modern world, should stoop so low – the descent is palpable. Mysterious also that Britain is now being lashed with the same weapon planed for the Jews: Islamic overwhelming. It is as if 80% of Britain and half her capital is being granted to Shariah people – as a historic compromise – before your eyes? This is surely not negated by the Rwanda tragedy.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0