[IsraelTimes] There were a number of troubling things about Wednesday night’s debate on a Gaza ceasefire in the House of Commons – but most alarming is the fear for MPs’ safety
Wednesday night’s debate on Gazoo ...Hellhole adjunct to Israel and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, inhabited by Gazooks. The place was acquired in the wake of the 1967 War and then presented to Paleostinian control in 2006 by Ariel Sharon, who had entered his dotage. It is currently ruled with an iron fist by Hamas with about the living conditions you'd expect. It periodically attacks the Hated Zionist Entity whenever Iran needs a ruckus created or the hard boyz get bored, getting thumped by the IDF in return. The ruling turbans then wave the bloody shirt and holler loudly about oppression and disproportionate response... in Britannia’s House of Commons did not show the "mother of parliaments" at its best.
Parliament is often at its best in moments of crisis and war. Foreign policy debates, where domestic politics stop at the water’s edge, are usually freer of partisan rancor and political point-scoring. But something went very wrong on Wednesday. Amid unprecedented chaos and uproar, MPs wrangled bitterly over arcane matters of parliamentary procedure. As the vote neared, the famous green benches emptied and MPs from the governing Conservative Party and the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP) — for once, allies against the main opposition Labour Party — walked out of the chamber in protest.
The domestic fallout is continuing with the position of the Speaker of the House of Commons, Lindsay Hoyle, apparently under threat.
While radio phone-in programs provided an opportunity for members of the public to vent their fury at MPs’ "playground politics," the reality is potentially far worse: that all the noise and fury was a reflection of the intimidation that parliamentarians are coming under from Islamist and far-left elements of the pro-Paleostinian movement.
It’s undeniable that party politics played heavily into Wednesday’s proceedings.
In November, the left-wing, anti-Israel SNP caused Labour leader Keir Starmer a political headache by putting forth a motion calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. Starmer, who has adopted a pro-Israel line and avoided such calls, suffered a parliamentary revolt as more than 50 of his MPs rebelled — some losing their shadow ministerial roles — and, defying the party whip, backed the SNP.
Using one of its allotted parliamentary days, the SNP was determined to repeat the gambit this week. Rather than attempting to seek consensus, its motion appeared designed to cause division and maximum discomfort for Labour. With the briefest of nods to the need for Hamas ...not a terrorist organization, even though it kidnaps people, holds hostages, and tries to negotiate by executing them,... to release the Israelis it seized on October 7, the motion called for an immediate ceasefire and lambasted the "collective punishment of the Paleostinian people."
As the SNP well knew, there was no way Starmer — who, polls show, is likely to become Britannia’s prime minister at a general election expected this autumn — would authorize his MPs to back such a one-sided call. Many Labour MPs — some reports suggest up to 100 — would have rebelled to back the motion, so desperate are they to show they support a ceasefire. For the SNP, this was a potential win-win. It wouldn’t just have provoked a nasty split in Labour’s ranks — it would also have allowed the SNP to tell left-leaning Scottish voters that the Labour leadership are pseudo-Tories who oppose a ceasefire.
The SNP, which runs the devolved Scottish government and holds most of Scotland’s seats in the Westminster parliament, is engaged in a political dogfight north of the border. Labour, which ruled the roost in Scotland before the failed 2014 independence referendum, is determined to rebuild its once-impregnable bastion and is making steady progress. If the polls tighten, it’ll need Scottish seats to form the next UK government. The SNP is thus happy to reach for any issue — including matters of life and death thousands of miles from Britannia — with which to batter Starmer and present him as hopelessly right-wing.
CACOPHONY OF VOICES
Things got so messy on Wednesday because both Labour and the Conservative-led government opted to raise their own amendments to the SNP motion. Substantively, there was barely a hair’s breadth between the two amendments.
Labour’s amendment spoke of an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire" and an "immediate stop to the fighting," but it carefully caveated that. Not only must Hamas release the hostages, but any ceasefire must be "observed by all sides," Labour said. "Israel cannot be expected to cease fighting if Hamas continues with violence," and Israelis have "the right to the assurance that the horror of October 7 cannot happen again."
The government’s amendment, which condemned the "slaughter, abuse and gender-based violence" of October 7 and backed "Israel’s right to self-defense," spoke of "an immediate humanitarian pause" and "moves towards a permanent sustainable ceasefire."
As the House of Commons’ brass hats warned Hoyle, "long-established conventions" mandate that the Speaker should only have selected the SNP and government motions for a debate and vote — not Labour’s. But Hoyle broke that convention and opted to allow all three motions to come before the House.
Unusually, Hoyle — a Labour MP before he was elected by MPs to the non-partisan role — met with Starmer shortly before making his decision. There have been allegations — strenuously denied by the Labour leader — that he put undue pressure on Hoyle, even threatening that the party wouldn’t support him remaining as Speaker if it wins the next election. Instead, Starmer says, he simply asked Hoyle to ensure that "the broadest possible debate" took place.
Whatever happened, Hoyle’s decision to allow the Labour motion to come up for a vote infuriated both the government and the SNP. Ministers announced they were pulling their amendment and sitting out the vote; the SNP and Tory MPs staged walkouts and demanded the Speaker appear before the House to explain himself.
Ironically, the upshot was that, amid all the chaos, the Labour motion went through on a nod. Such votes aren’t binding on the government and are largely symbolic. Moreover, the government will be well aware that if they hadn’t pulled their amendment in protest, the Tories’ majority would likely have enabled it to pass.
SAFETY FIRST?
Starmer undoubtedly had a strong political interest in ensuring his MPs got the chance to vote for the Labour amendment. But what appears to have swayed the Speaker’s decision were warnings from Labour that its MPs feared for their safety and that of their families if they couldn’t register publicly that they had voted for an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire."
Indeed, when he apologized to the House on Thursday for making a decision which, he admitted, had been a "mistake," Hoyle explicitly referenced this. "I won’t share the details, but the details of the things that have been brought to me are absolutely frightening on all members of this House, on all sides," he said. "I have a duty of care... and if my mistake is looking after members, I am guilty."
Hoyle is a straight arrow; fundamentally decent and well-regarded on all sides of the House. As one senior Conservative MP — who disagreed with Hoyle’s decision — said, the Speaker is "obsessed" with the safety of MPs and their staff.
He is right to be. For all the public’s gripes about politicians in general, many hold their own MP in high regard. That has much to do with their accessibility. Only the most senior members of the government have police protection. That accessibility has come with a heavy price tag. Twice in the past eight years, MPs have been brutally murdered as they went about their constituency duties. A young female Labour MP, Jo Cox, was rubbed out by a right-wing bad boy in 2016, while the much-liked Tory MP David Amess was stabbed to death by an Islamist terrorist in 2021 as he met constituents at an advice surgery.
The political strife over Brexit increased concerns around MPs’ security. Female MPs appear to have been a particular target for misogynists, especially on social media. And the antisemitism scandal in the Labour Party under its former hard-left leader Jeremy Corbyn left a number of his critics, including Jewish Labour MPs Ruth Smeeth and Luciana Berger, in need of extra security.
RAMPED UP POTENTIAL FOR VIOLENCE
But the war between Israel and Hamas has heightened the risk to MPs to new levels. From the outset, part of the pro-Paleostinian movement has been aggressive, uncompromising and vitriolic towards those who fail to toe its line.
As if to prove the point, demonstrators outside parliament on Wednesday night called for intifada, praised the Iran's Houthi sock puppets ...a Zaidi Shia insurgent group operating in Yemen. They have also been referred to as the Believing Youth. Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi is said to be the spiritual leader of the group and most of the military leaders are his relatives. The legitimate Yemeni government has accused the them of having ties to the Iranian government. Honest they did. The group has managed to gain control over all of Saada Governorate and parts of Amran, Al Jawf and Hajjah Governorates. Its slogan is God is Great, Death to America™, Death to Israel, a curse on the Jews They like shooting off... ummm... missiles that they would have us believe they make at home in their basements. On the plus side, they did murder Ali Abdullah Saleh, which was the only way the country was ever going to be rid of him... s, and projected the words "From the river to the sea" onto Big Ben.
Referencing his visit last week to the country, one Jewish Tory MP, Andrew Percy, told the House of Commons on Thursday that he "felt safer in Israel than I do in this country at this moment in time."
"For months I’ve been standing up here talking about the people on our streets demanding death to Jews, demanding Jihad, demanding intifadas as the police stand by and allow that to happen," he said. "This is going to continue happening because we’re not dealing with it."
Over recent weeks, MPs who have failed to support a ceasefire have been subjected to what one termed "vile abuse"; their offices have been attacked; and their family homes have been surrounded by demonstrators. Even as MPs were debating Gaza on Wednesday, protesters "stormed" the constituency office of Labour members of the Scottish parliament in Glasgow following a demonstration called by the Gaza Genocide Emergency Committee.
Some MPs, understandably, are calling it a day. Mike Freer, the pro-Israel Conservative MP for Finchley and Golders Green in North London, announced last month he was standing down at the next election. His constituency office was set alight in an arson attack in December, and he’s been subject to "serious threats" for several years.
Sadly, as one target leaves the scene, another emerges. Within hours of his victory in a special election last week, pro-Paleostinian activists began to focus on Labour MP Damien Egan. Egan, who converted to Judaism in 2018, is married to Yossi Felberbaum, an Israeli who has served in the IDF.
Whatever their differences, senior Labour and the Conservatives MPs are deeply concerned about the threats and intimidation.
They also agree that a Rubicon may have been crossed on Wednesday.
"Members of Parliament now feel that they have to vote in a certain way in order to safeguard their safety and that of their family," Tory MP Sir Charles Walker said during the debate. "That is a far bigger issue than the debate we are having tonight because if people are changing their votes or their behavior in this place because they are frightened of what may happen to them or their family out there, we have a real problem."
Gaza may be the flashpoint, but for Britons of all parties, a wider question — one which goes to the heart of the country’s centuries-old constitution — is at stake.
As David Wolfson, a Conservative member of the House of Lords, suggested in response to Wednesday night’s debate: "So the Speaker took his exceptional decision because of real threats to the safety of MPs, their families and staff. The old rule is proved yet again: what starts with the Jews, never ends with the Jews. Perhaps we can now, finally, stand up to those who threaten our democracy."
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Kirill Strelnikov
[RIA] The anniversary of any epoch-making event gives rise to an endless number of summaries, reports, calculations and reviews for every taste. The two-year anniversary of the Special Military Operation is, for obvious reasons, guaranteed to break all records, and we have a chance to study the NWO in front and profile - in kilometers, kilograms, heads, directions, settlements, units, coordinates, sorties, man-hours, shots and so on. All this is important and necessary, and all this valuable data will certainly be included in textbooks, manuals, monographs and annals. But perhaps it is equally important to listen to ourselves and understand what has changed in ourselves during this time.
#4
^^ It is why Leon Trosky, then Soviet defense commissar, formed the first of the Soviet machine gun/artillery divisions, unique formations only to the eastern oblasts.
#7
The Chinese have been quietly filtering into Russia’s far southeast for several decades, colonizing mostly empty villages as the Russian population moved closer to the comforts of the western cities.
This was planned, so it wouldn’t be a surprise if there are Chinese maps preemptively showing the future annexation. — just as they’ve had plans in place for winning the future war against America.
[Am Greatness] By the time you read this, Nikki Haley will be toast in South Carolina. She will lose by double digits, though the psephologists differ about the number that Trump’s victory will begin with. Most say 2 (as in 20 points), though some say 3 or even 4. A few spoilsports, looking at some very recent prognostications that show Trump’s margin diminishing in the Palmetto state, predict that Trump’s victory will be a two digit number beginning with 1 (as in 17). "Trump’s average lead in today’s South Carolina primary remains substantial, although it’s down from 34 points (Feb. 5-11) to 23 points now." Why? The poll adduces Haley’s massive spending in her home state, her attacks, and negative news stories about Trump. Also important are independents, who favor Haley 53-46, and—you guessed it—Democrats intending to vote in the GOP primary, who favor Haley by a factor of 79-16.
Of course, they do. Trump is a looming extinction event for Democrats, anti-Trump Republicans, and the deep state. I know no more than you, Dear Reader, but if I had a spare dart to toss at the target, I’d predict Trump’s victory in South Carolina will be somewhere close to 30 points—25, say, or 28. If you get up very early, you may know before I do whether I am right.
But whatever the number, we can begin rehearsing the goodbye, so long, farewell chorus for Nikki Haley. Not that anyone expects her to bow out gracefully, as did Vivek Ramaswamy after Iowa and Ron DeSantis just before New Hampshire. They both had the good of the party as well as the good of the country in mind. (Doubtless, they also had their future political prospects in mind.) They understood that they themselves had no path to victory in 2024. They understood further that four more years of Biden, or indeed any likely Democratic candidate, would be disastrous for the country. And so, whatever misgivings or resentments they might harbor about Donald Trump, they threw their weight, which means their votes, behind the man who is all but certain to be the GOP nominee.
Haley, on the contrary, has vowed to stay in the race for the duration. How long is that? Probably as long as she has money. Big faux conservatives like the Kochs have been supporting her, as have Democratic activists like the egregious Reid Hoffman, who also bankrolled E. Jean Carroll’s preposterous defamation suit against Donald Trump. Which means that Haley’s army of consultants will be earnestly advising her to "stay the course" since once she closes up shop, their paychecks will stop.
The commentator Frank Miele, writing about "The Curious Case of Nikki Haley" at RealClearPolitics, suggests a couple additional reasons that Haley may choose to stay in the race, even though she has essentially no chance of grabbing the nomination. For one thing, in order to qualify for the GOP debates, she had to pledge to support whomever the party finally settles upon as its nominee. "I affirm," she said with the other debaters, "that if I do not win the 2024 Republican nomination for President of the United States, I will honor the will of the primary voters and support the Republican presidential nominee in order to save our country and beat Joe Biden."
Will she honor that pledge? Who knows. But the longer she stays in the race, the longer she can postpone that day of reckoning. And the longer she stays in the race, the longer she can tell herself that she is politically relevant.
Miele’s column is quietly devastating. He lists some of the many things Haley has lied about—charging that Trump plans a 10 percent across-the-board tax increase, for example—and he puts his finger on the larger political dynamics standing behind Haley, Inc. She has become increasingly strident about her former boss—remember, she was once Trump’s ambassador to the United Nations—and the longer she persists with her campaign, the longer she can "say anything she wants about Trump, no matter how destructive, and justify it as the rough-and-tumble of politics."
Haley’s name-calling and fabrications do not really harm Trump, though they provide fodder for the anti-Trump media. And they give a pleasing frisson to donors, mostly Democrats, in fact or in effect, who are happy to keep writing checks not, as Miele notes, because they think it will help Haley—she is finished—but because they hope, mistakenly, that it will hurt Trump.
Indeed, Miele points out that, over the last couple of months, Haley has become increasingly hysterical and reckless. We have, he says, been given a picture of Haley, who is "either a shameless narcissist or a purposeful saboteur who aims to destroy not just Trump but the very Republican Party that adores him." I would add that those alternatives are not mutually exclusive. Miele raises the possibility that she is acting for some higher purpose than party loyalty. But some people said that about disgraced former FBI director James "Higher Loyalty" Comey, too. They were wrong about that shameless narcissist.
In any event, I think Miele is right. The party ought to "spew [out Haley] before she does any further damage." It’s almost, he says, "as though she’s become a stalking horse for Biden, trying out various lines of attack that might be useful for the current president against Trump in the fall campaign."
Keep that in mind as the campaign unfolds. Who knows? Given Biden’s manifest infirmity and the lack of plausible alternative Democratic candidates, perhaps Haley will take the ultimate next step. She has no chance of winning the GOP nomination. Miele notes that and remarks, "She might have a better chance of winning the Democratic nomination at this point." He said that in jest. But given the surreal character of American politics at the moment, Haley’s defection would be a disgusting but not surprising contingency.
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/25/2024 11:07 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[38 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
I watched an interview of 2 young male voters this morning. One voted Trump the other Haley. The Haley voter said he was a Democrat but felt his vote was best used for Haley. When asked if he would vote for Haley or Biden for President he said Biden.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
02/25/2024 14:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
^ So she actually lost much worse than was reported in the media. Crossover voting should be outlawed. Just another method of gaming the system, in my opinion.
#9
But, Haley is a disgusting thing. That she refuses to quit the primaries sure hints that there are other forces behind this. Besides, what's the RNC doing about this? /rhet
#10
Haley did well in the counties surrounding the cities of Columbia and Charleston. Also the county where the Marine bases are.
Lotsa govt employees, I figure.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
02/25/2024 17:42 Comments ||
Top||
Last Updated: Feb 25, 2024 at 9:44 PM
> 99%
est. reporting
CANDIDATES
PARTY
VOTES
PCT.
Donald J. Trump
GOP 451,905
59.8%
Nikki Haley
GOP 298,674
39.5%
Ron DeSantis
GOP 2,951
0.4%
Vivek Ramaswamy
GOP 726
0.1%
Chris Christie
GOP 657
0.1%
TOTAL
755,800
The state map is almost entirely red, except for Columbia, Charleston, and whatever is southwest of Charleston.
[NY Post] Another week, another master class by Joe Biden on how not to succeed as president. And Dr. Jill, Obama, et al
Fresh from stabbing Israel in the back and thumbing his nose at the Supreme Court over student loan forgiveness, Biden continued his wobbly ways by mucking up the two-year anniversary of the war in Ukraine.
He barely tried to persuade war-weary Americans they should support more aid for our outgunned ally and was perfunctory in outlining the geopolitical impact of a Russian victory.
In fact, if Ukraine falls, NATO nations would be next in line and Russian aggression could ignite a nuclear conflict.
That very real prospect must be a wake-up call for all of Washington.
It’s a measure of Biden’s mental and physical limitations that his handlers apparently decided he couldn’t carry off a prime-time address or a press conference to argue why the war still matters.
He also missed an opportunity to work with congressional Republicans to get that aid for Ukraine and close the southern border, a double play that would have been both good policy and good politics.
But Biden did none of those things.
As Casey Stengel asked about his hapless New York Mets, "Can’t anybody here play this game?"
The anniversary of the invasion came soon after the murder of dissident Alexei Navalny.
It gave the world fresh evidence of Vladimir Putin’s brutality, and a more nimble president would have used the moment to explain why Putin’s plan for a Greater Russia must be stopped.
Biden met with Navalny’s widow and daughter, but his limited effort at public persuasion was a dud.
In a lifeless and brief speech to governors gathered in the White House, he announced 500 new sanctions against Russians, a move that nobody claimed would change the course of the war.
It was quantity over quality.
If any of the new sanctions were significant, why weren’t they deployed earlier?
Unfortunately, the president’s main effort went to milking the Navalny murder and the aid standoff for political points.
He did it the old fashioned way — by attacking Republicans on a West Coast fund-raising trip.
"Look at what they are doing with the national security supplemental bill that provides assistance to Ukraine, Israel and Palestinian people. Nothing. Not a single thing. Why? Because that’s what Donald Trump tells them to do," Biden told Los Angeles donors Tuesday.
The next day, in San Francisco, Biden said the current crop of GOP lawmakers was "worse" than southern segregationists.
"I’ve been a senator since ’72. I’ve served with real racists," he said.
"I’ve served with Strom Thurmond. I’ve served with all these guys that have set terrible records on race. But guess what? These guys are worse."
Biden eulogized Thurmond, but calling him more of a patriot than Speaker Mike Johnson and other Republicans who are linking Ukraine aid to securing America’s southern border is beyond the pale.
Then again, President Unity is a frequent race baiter.
FADING DEM SUPPORT
In fact, Johnson’s positions on Ukraine and the border largely reflect the national mood, including among Biden’s fellow Democrats.
A January Pew poll found that a whopping 73% of Democrats rated the administration’s handling of the invasion of migrants from Mexico as "somewhat bad" or "very bad."
Pew reports that Dem unhappiness has climbed steadily, from 56% in 2021 to 62% last year and 73% now.
Many of those Dems no doubt live in or near crime-ravaged cities overrun by tens of thousands of illegal newcomers.
And still Biden does nothing, even though he could have gotten the urgent assistance Ukraine needs while also addressing a problem that could cost him the election.
Snip. Read the rest at the link.
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/25/2024 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[25 views]
Top|| File under: Tin Hat Dictators, Presidents for Life, & Kleptocrats
#1
"In fact, if Ukraine falls, NATO nations would be next in line and Russian aggression could ignite a nuclear conflict." Same old fears and loathing. Boarding countries to Russia now are less fearful of an Russian attack of any sort. Putin simply dealing with a NATO thorn in Russian side. No desire to have American nuclear missiles in their countries.
[Daily Mail, where America gets its news] Joe Biden has lost it.
No, not his brain. That curdled to cream decades ago.
Finally, his most fervid and frothing cheerleaders – from the New York Times to the dreary Daily Show – are fleeing the wreckage and tentatively raising the alarm.
What on Earth took them so long? Why are the liberalia finally waking up to wet beds and admitting that, perhaps, their collapsing candidate has drifted off from his moorings.
You have to give them credit, they stuck around and clung on as long as they could – inventing every excuse and ruse that suited them. That Young Joe was raring to go, claims of senility were a MAGA witch hunt, and haven't you seen how fabulous Kamala is?
But now, as the sun rises on the latest polling (by Quinnipiac) stating that 64 percent of Americans think Biden's mentally unfit, they find themselves past the point of no return, stuck with a candidate they neither want nor can replace.
"I played freshman football at Delaware and ended up low- –I shouldn’t say this, but you had to have 2.0 to keep going and I had 2.99 — I mean, a 1.99. And my mother made me quit, but I went back out my — my junior year to play, and my senior year."
Detailed table of what was flown during Gulf War I at the link. I’m not sure what the comparison between the two wars is intended to suggest, so I look forward to what you lot have to say, dear Reader. :-)
[NextBigFuture] Israel in the Gazoo ...Hellhole adjunct to Israel and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, inhabited by Gazooks. The place was acquired in the wake of the 1967 War and then presented to Paleostinian control in 2006 by Ariel Sharon, who had entered his dotage. It is currently ruled with an iron fist by Hamas with about the living conditions you'd expect. It periodically attacks the Hated Zionist Entity whenever Iran needs a ruckus created or the hard boyz get bored, getting thumped by the IDF in return. The ruling turbans then wave the bloody shirt and holler loudly about oppression and disproportionate response... War has had a total number of air strikes that is 39% of the number of Arclight airstrike ...KABOOM!... s that the US Air Force performed in the 1991 Gulf War.
The Israel Air Force has carried out strikes against more than 31,000 targets belonging to Hamas ...a contraction of the Arabic words for "frothing at the mouth",... and other terror groups since the war began, mostly in Gaza (29,000 targets), but also in Leb ...an Iranian satrapy currently ruled by Hassan Nasrallah situated on the eastern Mediterranean, conveniently adjacent to Israel. Formerly inhabited by hardy Phoenecian traders, its official language is now Arabic, with the usual unpleasant side effects. The Leb civil war, between 1975 and 1990, lasted a little over 145 years and produced 120,000 fatalities. The average length of a ceasefire was measured in seconds. The Lebs maintain a precarious sectarian balance among Shiites, Sunnis, and about a dozen flavors of Christians, plus Armenians, Georgians, and who knows what else? It is the home of the original Hezbollah, which periodically starts a war with the Zionist Entity, gets Beirut pounded to rubble, and then declares victory and has a parade. The Lebs have the curious habit of periodically murdering their heads of state or prime ministers... and other fronts, racking up over 186,000 flight hours. Of the strikes, 26,000 were carried out by fighter jets, 3,800 with attack helicopters, and 3,800 with drones.
The 31000 strikes compares to 80,000 sorties performed by the US Air Force in the 1991 Gulf War. The US flew close to 80,000 sorties out of overall 116,000 sorties from the entire multi-national coalition. Israel’s war is not done yet. Israel does not have B-52 or B-1 bombers to the tonnage of bombs is far less.
The US F-16s flew nearly 13,500 sorties in the Gulf War. This was the highest for any system in the war. The F-111 flew over 4,000 sorties with a high mission capable rate.
The Israeli Air Force (IAF) flies the F-15, F-35, and F-16 fighter jets that have been launching airstrikes in the Gaza Strip since the October 7, 2023, terror attacks on Israel by Hamas holy warriors. As of November 8, 2023, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) operates 50 F-15 A/B/C/D variants and 25 F-15 I aircraft. The IAF also has about 224 F-16 Sufa and Barak in operation.
Israel’s F-16 in this 2023-2024 war were probably used nearly twice as much as the US used F-16s in the Gulf War.
Israel has about fifty F-35s and will get another 25 delivered in 2024 to reach 75 F-35s.
[IsraelTimes] Hundreds of thousands have rallied globally but relatively few have taken to the streets in the Islamic Republic, where the Palestinian cause is identified with an unpopular regime.
While massive crowds have thronged Arab, European and North American cities over the past four months chanting pro-Paleostinian and anti-Israel slogans, Iranian streets have witnessed very few such scenes. Only a relatively small number of demonstrations have been staged in the Islamic Theocratic Republic since October 7 in solidarity with Gazooks, and in most cases, they were minor state-sponsored rallies. The unenthusiastic public support is in sharp contrast with the hardline anti-Israel policy of the Islamic Theocratic Republic, which for years has offered its patronage to Hamas ...the well-beloved offspring of the Moslem Brotherhood,... , Hezbollah, and the Paleostinian Islamic Jihad
Continued on Page 49
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...not a terrorist organization, even though it kidnaps people, holds hostages, and tries to negotiate by executing them,...
[Am Greatness] By the time you read this, Nikki Haley will be toast in South Carolina. She will lose by double digits, though the psephologists differ about the number that Trump’s victory will begin with. Most say 2 (as in 20 points), though some say 3 or even 4. A few spoilsports, looking at some very recent prognostications that show Trump’s margin diminishing in the Palmetto state, predict that Trump’s victory will be a two digit number beginning with 1 (as in 17). "Trump’s average lead in today’s South Carolina primary remains substantial, although it’s down from 34 points (Feb. 5-11) to 23 points now." Why? The poll adduces Haley’s massive spending in her home state, her attacks, and negative news stories about Trump. Also important are independents, who favor Haley 53-46, and—you guessed it—Democrats intending to vote in the GOP primary, who favor Haley by a factor of 79-16.
...a contraction of the Arabic words for "frothing at the mouth",...
...the well-beloved offspring of the Moslem Brotherhood,...
