The discussion on the very important Israpundit site has been hijacked by a clique surrounding a person calling himself Yamit82, also involved is a person calling himself Bernard Ross and there are others, all forming an obvious clique.


This is indeed sad because there is need for open and fair discussion at this time.


The editor Ted Belman is clearly not in agreement with this clique. Belman performs a very useful service by airing a wide range of topics on Israpundit but discussion has now become arguably impossible.


You can see this clearly on


Anyway I wanted to make that clear to our readers on


I wanted to send all our support to Ted Belman and Israpundit. We have the same aim which is for Jews to be able to live unmolested by Antisemitism.


One of the strange themes that this clique on Israpundit developed in recent years (which was pushed especially by Robinson) was that the Arab Spring and all the in-fighting among Arabs actually, he said, strengthened Israel.


Robinson kept on at this week after week.


This also led to a strengthening of the Yamit82 person who called for Israel to take up no position on Egypt, that is not to defend Mubarak, leading on to not supporting General el-Sisi in his present suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood.


We on 4international thought all of this most strange. Why should Israel not state openly its open and bold support for the suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood, and do so from a position of INDEPENDENCE!


How could Israel being encircled by Fascist Muslim Brotherhood states not weaken Israel, endanger Israel!


In fact read any article on Jihadwatch or on Pamela Geller´s Atlas Shrugs and you will see the opposite to Robinson…they are most worried for Israel.


As just today this on Pamela Geller´s Atlas Shrugs shows that she is most worried!





And the war in Syria spreads to Lebanon. Soon it will engulf the whole Middle East.

Nabil Mounzer / EPA

“Ex-ambassador to US killed in Lebanon bomb blast; four others slain,” NBC News, December 27, 2013

A car bombing in the Lebanese capital Friday targeted a key opponent to Syrian President Bashar Assad. NBC’s Ayman Mohyeldin reports. By Mustafa Kassem and Alastair Jamieson, NBC News









You sound so like a preacher man


And your politics lead you into an abyss of hopelessness and helplessness


Also you attack a great many of the Jewish people of Israel who do not believe in the supernatural but who are prepared to fight for Israel as much as any (believing in the supernatural) Jew.


You also are very divisive because you insult people who believe in secularism and you confuse that secularism with hatred of religion and of Jewish tradition


And where is your political programme?


If Netenyahu was elected because of Livni and Olmert betrayal, and if Netanyahu in September is preparing to betray also, what then? Apart from your preaching and slagging off atheists what do you concretely propose?


The reference above to Livni is indeed correct. I heard her in an interview and while she may be an intelligent person she spoke in a dreary and mechanical fashion, mainly because her programme, and also the programme of what you call the “Left” is indeed also dreary. Her words were in synch with her programme.


There is need now for a revolutionary leadership in Israel. But in saying so I place down one caveat, which is that when Israeli political leaders like Netanyahu come under attack from anti-Semites in US and EU, as well as from anti-Semitic Jews in Israel, then he must be defended, critically, but defended nevertheless. I am not going to enter into a barging match over Leon Trotsky, but for sure the time has come to build a Trotskyist party in Israel, which will place itself at the forefront of the struggle, and will seek to create a unity with patriotic Jews who fight from the perspective of Judaism


My website is




The path to the next Lebanon War

July 12, 2011, 2:42 AM









Five years ago this week, Iran’s Lebanese proxy opened war with Israel. The war lasted 34 days, during which Hezbollah launched more than 4,000 missiles against Israel. Now five years later, under US President Barack Obama, America is pushing a policy that drastically escalates the chance that a new war between Israel and Iran’s Lebanese army will break out again in the near future.


Back in 2006, Israel’s response to Hezbollah’s aggression was swift but incompetent. While Israel scored some blows against the Iranian proxy force, the war ended with Hezbollah still shooting. Israel failed to defeat the terror army. And because Hezbollah survived, it won the war.


This truth is exposed in all its ugliness by the political and military realities five years on. Today, Hezbollah is not simply in charge of Israel’s former security zone in South Lebanon.


It is in charge of all of Lebanon. The Hezbollah-controlled government controls all aspects of the Lebanese state that it wishes. These include the military, the telecommunications networks, and the international borders, airports and sea ports, among other things.


Today, Hezbollah has not merely refilled its depleted missile arsenals. It has tripled the size of its missile arsenals. In 2006, IAF strikes in the first 24 hours of the war knocked out all of Hezbollah’s long-range missiles. Today, not only have those stocks been replenished, Hezbollah’s arsenal includes missiles with ranges covering all of Israel, with larger payloads and many with guidance systems.


The lessons of the war are easy to see. And the Israeli public, which learned them five years ago, still hasn’t forgotten them.


GENERALLY SPEAKING, the war taught us three lessons. The first lesson is that you can’t convince terrorists to lay down their arms simply by walking away. Israel withdrew from its security zone in southern Lebanon in 2000. The withdrawal was a precursor to its withdrawal from Gaza in 2005. In 2006, Israel was attacked from both territories.


In the lead-up to both withdrawals, Israel’s national leadership told the public that the only reason terrorists from these territories were attacking us was that we were there. If we went away, they would stop hating us and we would be safe. We were the problem, not them, so we could solve the problem by giving them what they wanted.


Although then-prime minister Ehud Olmert and then-foreign minister Tzipi Livni continued to push appeasement through their insistence that Israel surrender Judea and Samaria, the war of 2006 showed the public the folly of their plans. And at first opportunity, the public elected the Likud and other right-wing parties – which oppose appeasement – to form the current government.


The second lesson the public learned is that when a nation goes to war against an enemy that seeks its destruction, it must fight to win. You cannot fight a half-war against an implacable foe. And if you fail to win, you lose.


This is not how Israel fought the war of 2006. Partially due to pressure from then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and partially due to his own strategic incomprehension, Olmert believed it was possible to fight to a draw without losing.


In the event, there was only one way for Israel to defeat Hezbollah – by regaining control over southern Lebanon. Any other conclusion to the war would leave Hezbollah standing. And simply by surviving intact, as Lebanese Druse leader Walid Jumblatt warned at the time, the road would be paved for Hezbollah to take over Lebanon.


But Olmert – and Livni – wouldn’t even consider retaking control of South Lebanon. The option was discarded contemptuously as a delusional recipe for forcing Israel back into the “Lebanese quagmire.” The fact that the “Lebanese quagmire” came to Israel after we left Lebanon, and that it will only end when Israel defeats Hezbollah, was completely ignored.


Olmert’s and Livni’s reason for rejecting the one strategy that would have brought Israel victory is explained by the third lesson of the war. That lesson is that once a leader is ideologically committed to a policy of appeasement, he is unable to allow rational considerations to permeate his thinking.


THE OLMERT government was elected in 2006 on the basis of its plan to repeat the Lebanon and Gaza withdrawals in Judea and Samaria. During the war, Olmert told his supporters that victory in Lebanon would enable him to carry out his planned withdrawal from Judea and Samaria. And this was true. But because of the circular logic of appeasement, there was no way that Olmert could fight to win.


If Israel had retaken control of southern Lebanon, Olmert would have had a chance of convincing the public that unilateral withdrawal was a viable strategy. He would have been able to argue that just as the IDF retook control of southern Lebanon, so it would retake control of Judea and Samaria if the Palestinians used the vacated lands to attack the rest of the country.


But because he was committed to appeasement, Olmert could not fight to win in Lebanon. The appeasement agenda is predicated on the disavowal of the notion of military victory and the embrace of the mantra, “There is no military solution.”



If victory is an option, then surrender along the lines that Olmert preached in Judea and Samaria is also an option. That is, surrender is an option, not an imperative, as he claimed. And if victory is an option, then clearly it has much more to recommend it than defeat.


But with their appeasement agenda reigning supreme – as appeasement agendas always do – instead of fighting to win, Olmert and Livni sued for a cease-fire. That is, they sought a diplomatic solution to a military problem. And since by not losing, Hezbollah won the military contest, it also came out the victor in UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which set the conditions of the cease-fire.


Resolution 1701 was a massive victory for Hezbollah. The resolution placed the international terror group run by Iran on equal footing with Israel, a sovereign state. The security arrangements in the resolution were an invitation for Hezbollah to rearm. It was pure fantasy to believe that the Hezbollah-dominated Lebanese government would block Hezbollah’s rearmament. And it was utter madness to think that European military forces would lift a finger to prevent Hezbollah from reasserting full control over the border with Israel.


But again, if you accept the circular logic of appeasement – that always puts the burden of proof on the non-aggressor – then you will never learn these, or any other lessons. And as a consequence, appeasers will always and forever foment wars in the name of peace.


THE ISRAELI public learned these lessons and elected a government that understands them. Perhaps if the American people had elected Senator John McCain to succeed George W. Bush in 2008, the US government would have learned these lessons as well. And then maybe together the Israeli and the US governments might have set about fixing at least some of the damage the war caused them both.


But in their wisdom, the American people elected Barack Obama to succeed Bush in the White House. And Obama has learned none of the lessons of the last war. Consequently Obama’s current policies are increasing the likelihood of another war between Israel and Iran’s Lebanese proxy in the near future.


Far from recognizing the nature of Hezbollah, the Obama administration has tried to wish away its implacability. Last May, Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan spoke of the administration’s plan to cultivate “moderate elements” in the Iranian-run jihadist organization.


The Obama administration’s notion that the US can adopt a nuanced approach to the terror group is put paid by Hezbollah’s takeover of the Lebanese government, its growing capabilities in the Western hemisphere, its continued devotion to the cause of Israel’s destruction, its participation in the killing of Syrian anti-regime protesters, and Iran’s clear control over all aspects of the organization’s operations. And yet, by all accounts, the administration refuses to acknowledge that there can be no nuance toward Hezbollah.


The dangers of Obama’s rejection of these basic truths were exposed this week. Sunday the government approved the demarcation of Israel’s territorial waters along the border with Lebanon. The borders will be submitted to the UN.


Israel’s move was forced on it by the Obama administration.


The dispute over the sea border arose after Israel discovered massive quantities of natural gas in its territorial waters in 2009. Acting on orders from Hezbollah and Iran, the Lebanese government immediately claimed erroneously that the waters belonged to Lebanon. Last August, Lebanon submitted its claim to the UN.


Israel negotiated its maritime borders with Cyprus in 2007. The same year, Cyprus also negotiated its maritime borders with Lebanon. At the time, Lebanon did not claim the areas in which Israel has discovered natural gas deposits or the areas abutting those areas, which are suspected of similarly containing large natural gas deposits. Lebanon’s current claim includes Israel’s territorial waters abutting the gas fields it discovered in 2009.


In staking this false claim, as it did with the Shaba Farms on Mount Dov in the Golan Heights in 2000, Lebanon is setting up a casus belli against Israel.


Under the circumstances, the only rational policy that the US can possibly adopt is to loudly and strenuously back Israel’s claim and reject all Lebanese contentions to the contrary.


Only by completely rejecting Lebanon’s claim can the US deny Hezbollah and Iran the ability to use Israel’s gas finds in its territorial waters as a justification for war.


Rather than do this, guided by its appeasement ideology, the Obama administration has refused to take sides. It urged Israel to submit its counter-claim to the UN – where it can bully Israel into accepting arbitration of the dispute by the inherently anti-Israel UN.


More generally, by refusing to take sides, the US is in fact siding with its enemy Iran and Iran’s proxy Hezbollah against its ally Israel.


Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 


Thanks to Caroline Glick on













The following is a post from the famous newspaper Jerusalem Post, which all the anti-Semites in the world hate.


It came to 4international via Ted Belman of Israpundit


Some comments by 4international at the end of the Jerusalem Post entry



The IDF is taking extra precautions and preparing a firm but non-lethal response to any attempt to force the nation’s borders in the coming days, as Palestinians plan mass marches to mark Arab losses in the Six Day War.

IDF units have dug a barbed-wire-protected trench along the Golan Heights security fence at Majdal Shams, Israel Radio reported.

Residents of the Druse village have been instructed not to approach the fence, which some 100 Syrians crossed on May 15 in a dramatic cross-border breach.

Near Moshav Avivim, troops have fortified the border fence with Lebanon and set up new lookout posts, the radio station reported.

The IDF Northern Command has ordered soldiers on the Syrian and Lebanese borders to follow the usual rules of engagement before opening fire. They are instructed to shout warnings at protesters approaching the border, then, should those instructions be ignored, to fire warning shots in the air, a military source said on Wednesday.

If marchers continue to approach the fence, troops are ordered to direct nonlethal fire at their lower bodies, the source said.

“We could also use tear gas and stun grenades. But we won’t tolerate the idea that our international borders will become like Bil’in,” the source said.

Bil’in is a village near Modi’in Illit and the site of Friday protests in which the West Bank security barrier is routinely damaged.

“We are talking about protecting our international borders,” the source said. “We won’t let the other side get its wish and have 70 people killed…

We have no intention of letting Syria and Lebanon use these incidents to delegitimize Israel.”

An extensive campaign on Facebook and other Internet forums is calling for marches on Israel’s borders with Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Gaza, and for Arabs in Israel, the West Bank and Jerusalem to converge on the Aksa Mosque to declare their “allegiance” to the city. Three separate but similar rallies are planned for this Friday, Sunday and Tuesday, with Sunday – the anniversary of the war’s outbreak in 1967 – expected to draw the largest crowds.

An IDF officer told The Associated Press this week that the army would set “red lines” for demonstrators and would provide troops with crowd-control tools such as rubber bullets and water cannons to handle “life-threatening situations.”

The official said the army would be better equipped to handle protests than it was two weeks ago, when on “Nakba Day” – the annual Palestinian day of mourning over Israel’s creation – at least 10 people were killed on the Lebanese and Syrian borders while trying to enter the country.

The most active group organizing the rallies on “Naksa Day” – the day of the Arab “setback” in 1967 – calls itself Third Palestinian Intifada. The group’s Facebook page features a clock counting down the days, hours, minutes and seconds beneath a banner reading “June 7.”

The page has been removed by Facebook several times for inciting violence, only to return under a slightly different name. Since going back up in April, the site has amassed some 375,000 followers.

Lebanon’s press has also been abuzz with plans for mass rallies. The pro- Syrian Ad-Diyar daily quoted organizers suggesting 100,000 people would participate in processions from refugee camps in Beirut, Sidon and Tyre to the village of Maroun al-Ras, the site of border clashes on this year’s “Nakba Day” that left more than 10 people dead.

As-Safir, a left-wing pan-Arab daily published in Beirut, reported that the Lebanese Army has no intention of allowing a repeat of last month’s disturbances.

“Senior military sources told As-Safir that the Lebanese Army has ‘good control of the border’ and will not allow anyone to tamper with security,” the paper said. Western sources said Maj.-Gen. Alberto Asarta, commander of the UNIFIL monitoring force in south Lebanon, would be traveling to Israel to discuss plans for dealing with the unrest, the paper reported.

UNIFIL spokesman Neeraj Singh told Beirut’s English-language Daily Star newspaper the force had no official confirmation so far about the march in its area of operations. He added that it was the Lebanese Army’s responsibility to secure the safety of protesters, “although we always stand ready to assist the LAF [the Lebanese Armed Forces], if they so request.”

A Lebanese military source told the paper the LAF might keep protesters from approaching the border altogether.

“The army has reservations about allowing protesters to reach the border,” he reportedly said. “We will not allow a repeat of what happened on Nakba Day, in terms of the killings of Palestinians.”

The same report quoted a senior Fatah commander in Lebanon saying a peaceful rally would proceed from the coastal town of Nakoura, across the border from Rosh Hanikra, to the Shi’ite village of Khiam, 4 km. north of Metull





Obviously war is being stepped up on the Jewish Homeland. By whom…there can only be one answer…by world anti-Semitism



This war against the Jewish Homeland is being fought by ignorant savages some of whom are masquerading as journalists


Some even masquerade as the learned people of the Guardian, Times, Independent, the Churches…the list is endless because world anti-Semitism is endless


The response of Israel and of Israeli politicians is not sufficient and is not adequate to this threat. But in saying that this war is being fought in every country, and since we do not live in Israel that is our responsibility to do something about this


The very first thing that must be done is that we on the side of the Jewish Homeland must form a United Front against this


Pamela Geller has noted that these anti-Semites in the world have had their inspiration from the election of Obama. This has nothing to do with the colour of the man’s skin, in fact blacks should be in alliance with Jews. It has to do with his politics, and his clear alliance with the forces of side of American politics, which is to use the Palestinian Arab issue to, and the forces around Palestinian Arab anti-Semitism.


Obama has come from the Khalidi/Edward Said/Pastor Wright area of American anti-Semitism


How this can be combatted…we have to start from fundamentals and ask what this “Palestinian Arab State” is all about.


To answer that question means that we have to be very familiar with this history, from 1920 onwards, especially 1948 and 1967.


It is around these dates that the big lies are told.


Can I add a few words about the Irish radio presenter Richie (“Finkelstein is a great scholar”) Allen


My most fundamental disagreement with Allen is on a question of philosophy and method.


Allen thinks that there are 4 or 5 different versions of this history. Bull Shit Allen! That is relativism and total Bull Crap.


We will fight you on that Allen.


We have 10 major articles on history being prepared on our sister site


Slow progress but we will get there.


Write us here, join us, help us.