A fifth columnist, by Presidential appointment?

john

AMBASSADOR John Limbert was a career Foreign Service Officer who was held hostage in Iran for 444 days! And you write that he's Iran's "own man" in Washington. Disgusting. You should take down this article and apologize while you still can.

MaxSceptic

John,

You've obviously never seen the Manchurian Candidate.

Derek BLADES

John Limbert actually knows something about Iran, its recent history and its internal politics. President Obama has once again shown his talent for picking the right person for a difficult and challenging assignment.

WestRight

John, did you read this column? John Limbert, serves on the advisory board of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC,)
The Council is widely considered the de facto lobby for the Iranian regime in America. It opposes sanctions on Iran, soft-pedals any controversial events in Iran, and counsels ‘patience’ regarding Iran's stance towards its nuclear program.

porkbelly

Limbert seems more of a well-meaning, naive boob than an undercover Iranian agent - and all the more dangerous for that. He is typical example of Stockholm Syndrome, whereby Foreign Service officers become advocates for whatever country they are posted to rather than their own. It would seem doubtful that he will have much effect in changing American policy towards Iran, though, since the Fifth Columnist in Chief has already made it clear that grovelling, apologizing and appeasement are the orders of the day.

Bob from Virginia

Don't worry, Glenn Beck and Fox News will get him.
I swear Obama must own stock in Fox News.

Philo

I am new to this game: I take it that this is NOT an example of double standards because Israel is a friend to the US and its "men" within the governing elite and within various administrations over the years therefore cannot be considered a risk to national security, even when they pass on secret documents. Is that how it works? This furthers the debate on peace in the Middle East how?

benjamin

John,
You've gone and spoiled the party by telling us about Limbert's heroic past. The anti-Iran hatefest will be delayed while the usual bloggers check out this guy Limbert. I checked out Ed Lasky and the American Thinker - extreme right wing journal dedicated almost entirely to smearing Obama.

aramkr

Yes, Philo, that's how it works. I miss the relevance of your final question.

A proud American

how foolish is your publication? or does it simply not care about facts? no mention that John Limbert was the highest ranked US diplomat held hostage for 444 days in the US embassy? nor that his expertise on US-Iran relations far outweighs the combined experience of the top 10 Bush-appointed officials... you guys are a joke.

C. Gee

Philo:

Israel is an ally of the US.
Iran is an enemy of the US.
You are indeed new to this game.

Joseph

Dear Philo

There is nothing wrong with applying double standards when speaking about two different things. In this case we have, on the one hand, a modern, progressive Western democracy seeking peace and development, and on the other a totalitarian regime adhering to a repressive and regressive ideology seeking to conquer the world and drag it back to the Bronze Age. I dare say if ever there was a time for applying double standards in choosing whom to support, this is it.

Terry, Eilat - Israel

In a sense, Obama & his team are no longer relevent in discussing Iran. The real decision is with Israeli PM Netanyahu - will he pull the trigger or not? Speaking as an Israeli, I can tell you that there is a broad concensus that military action on our part is necessary & inevitable. The failure of the international community to do ANYTHING meaningful for the last 8 years to stop Iran's nuclear program has left us no other option. Virtually no one here trusts the Obama administration on any issue, least of all, on Iran.

Mr Melrose

How objective and balanced are American Thinker and Frontpage? Just asking as they are now the standard reference in Mel's scribblings these days.

logdon

Stop! Your naivity is killing me. Or will, the way things are headed.

"Islamist Perfidy and Western Naivety
Which Is More Lethal?

by Raymond Ibrahim
Pajamas Media
November 9, 2009

www.meforum.org/2496/islamist-perfidy-western-naivety

In a blog entry for Islamist Watch, David J. Rusin shows how the word "jihad" continues to be euphemized in the West. Despite Islamic law's unequivocal portrayal of it as a military endeavor to empower Islam, jihad is still being peddled as "nothing more than a student laboring to pass algebra, a mom driving her kids to soccer practice, or, in the words of the Cambridge study, a civic-minded person engaged in 'lobbying, activism, and writing' — a community organizer of sorts." Rusin concludes by observing: "Why Islamists peddle such specious definitions should be clear. More baffling and disturbing is why they gain traction among so many Westerners."

Indeed, therein lies the irony: Islamist perfidy is only to be expected; Western naivety, on the other hand, which, if anything, should have begun to dissipate in our post-9/11 world, has burgeoned to the point of nearly making the former unnecessary. For while there is no doubt that Islamists (and their misguided Western cronies) distort the meaning of jihad, increasingly, even when the true meaning is in plain sight, America's leaders and media still fail to discern it. In other words, apathy — or willful blindness — regarding jihad has become so deep-seated in the West that Islamists need no longer actively dissemble."

And, it gets worse as he describes a NYPD Ramadam ‘reach out’ where this is spoken

“Only the last few words — qawm al-kaffirin, "nation of infidels" — are crystal clear, raising red flags. Thanks to my trusty Arabic-Koranic concordance, I have placed this phrase as part of Koran 2:286, which supplicates Allah "to make us [Muslims] victorious over the nation of infidels." Bear in mind that, from an Islamist point of view, the United States is the "nation of infidels" par excellence.”

If not so tragic our eagerness to accomodate is laughable.

Greg D

@Logdon

Hold your horses. I agree that radical Islam poses a deadly threat to the West. At the same time, complete identification with Israel's is a strategic blunder on our behalf.

If, as Terry says, an Israeli attack on Iran is inevitable, it will require overt US permission.

Surely you will agree that this will make things much, much harder for the West (at home, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, etc). Iran does not threaten the West directly. It threatens Israel. Even then, I think it nigh impossible that Iran would use nuclear weapons in an unprovoked attack against Israel: such a course of action would be assured self-destruction and would isolate it from ANY international support it may currently enjoy.

As such, and given that aggressive action against Iran by the West can at best delay its nuclear programme and will undoubtedly inflame the region, engagement and containment are the best way forward. If Israel gets butterflies about this, that's not our problem.

Louise

Anyone actually going challenge the content of the American Thinker piece?

Of course not. Too embarrassing.

So let's just go for the old ad hominem attack: it's Right wing. Don't bother with the evidence they present, just say Right wing and close off the debate that way - much easier.

Elise

Congress is too busy bankrupting our country so that if we survive a nuclear Iran we will be beholdent to the Chinese because they hold our IOUs. The President and Congress are betraying the American people. Hopefully the people will wake up before its too late.

Tony Allwright

"Greg D @Logdon" writes, "I agree that radical Islam poses a deadly threat to the West ... Iran does not threaten the West directly. It threatens Israel."

Hello-o-o-o!

Israel is an intrinsic part of "the West", just as Japan and Australia are. You don't have to be in the west to be part of "the West". This term refers to those countries which embrace and uphold democracy, freedom, individual human rights and capitalism and whose people are as a result wealthy and content.

Do not ever think that the destruction of Israel will not be followed by equally vile attacks on other countries of "the West".

Sam ARMSTRONG

Philo: in addition to the other replies to your post, it's essential you know that the Islamists started the Israel/Palestine war. The land of Israel is ancient and predates Prophet Mo. Those we call "Palestinians" are artificial and are in fact from Arabia. The true indigenous of Palestine are the Jews. That's why the modern state of Israel was created where it was and not out of the way in Australia or somewhere else. And that's why, if Israel loses this war, it would be worse than catastrophic for those who want to live in a civilised world, including you.

Augustus

Since the mass protests against the re-election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in June hundreds of people have been arrested in Iran, and during a protest last Wednesday, 109 more were arrested, of whom 80 have since been released. But it has been determined that prisoners have been tortured to death during interrogations. The authorities have also been accused of raping prisoners.

Now the US Government has all but dismantled the Iran Democracy Fund, which President Bush founded to support the Iranian opposition. President Obama is sending the wrong message. It's not just about funding, it means they have stopped thinking about human rights. The US wants to negotiate with the government of Ahmadinejad, which will allow him to increase the pressure on the opposition. It is now more important than ever for the international community to raise the issue of human rights. There's a lot of talk about the Iranian nuclear programme, but very little about human rights, and there are no sanctions to demand improvement. The internal security forces are now being more agressive than ever, but that makes the opposition fighting for democracy only braver than ever. Undeniably, there is fear, but people take to the streets regardless.

Derek BLADES

C. Gee, November 11th, told Philo that "Israel is an ally of the US."

Could Mr/Mrs Gee please elaborate? What help or support has Israel given the United States recently? Is deliberately blocking Obama’s peace process by continuing its land-grab in the occupied territories the behaviour of an ally? If so, who needs enemies?

Britain, France, Germany, Australia are true allies. They have loyally, if unwisely, spilled blood in support of American war aims. Israel, by contrast, holds out a begging bowl for its annual “aid” package from the United States, undermines its democracy though the machinations of AIPAC, steals its military and nuclear secrets and, under the ridiculous Netanyahu, goes out of its way to disrupt American peace aims in the Middle East.

An “ally”? You may want to ask Father Christmas for a dictionary this year.

Dixon

"john
November 10th, 2009 7:02pm
AMBASSADOR John Limbert was a career Foreign Service Officer who was held hostage in Iran for 444 days! And you write that he's Iran's "own man" in Washington. Disgusting. You should take down this article and apologize while you still can."

Ever heard of the "Manchurian Candidate". Its based on real events. Dozens of career patriots ( servicemen ) who had served their countries ( USA and UK ) for many years returned home from far less than 444 days in captivity in North Korea, as committed Communists and declared enemies of their own people. Thats a fact son, you should read some books.I recommend "Battle for the Mind" and "The Mind Possessed" by William Sargent. A quick name-check of the topic de-jour on Google doesnt count for either knowledge or reasoning.

Anglo-Libyan

Sam ARMSTRONG might benefit from a small lesson in the ethnic makeup of the Arab World. The Palestinians are, indeed, not simply people from Arabia. This is clear in that Saudis do not look like Palestinians who do not look like Syrians and so on until we reach Morocco. The only ‘ethnic’ Arabs are those of the Arabian Peninsula proper, and parts of Syria and Jordan. The rest are what we call in Arabic ‘mustariba’, that is ‘Arabized’ – they speak Arabic and adopted Arabic culture in the wake of the Arab conquests, much in the same way that Roman culture spread through Europe. Less than one percent of Egyptians are ethnic Arabs, for example. Any decent history book by any reasonable scholar will make that clear. ‘Arab’ is primarily a linguistic term and we ae all indigenous to our lands. Any suggestion otherwise is simply facile.

Dixon

"Philo
November 10th, 2009 9:44pm
I am new to this game: I take it that this is NOT an example of double standards because Israel is a friend to the US and its "men" within the governing elite and within various administrations over the years therefore cannot be considered a risk to national security, even when they pass on secret documents. Is that how it works? This furthers the debate on peace in the Middle East how?"

Its very simple. Israel doesnt declare "death to the USA" every day of its existence. Iran doeas. It doesnt take a genius to work out that the two relationships cannot be the same.

Dixon

"A proud American
November 11th, 2009 4:35am
how foolish is your publication? or does it simply not care about facts? no mention that John Limbert was the highest ranked US diplomat held hostage for 444 days in the US embassy? nor that his expertise on US-Iran relations far outweighs the combined experience of the top 10 Bush-appointed officials... you guys are a joke."

Dozens of "proud Americans" returned home from less than 444 days captivity in North Korea and China as converts to Communism and dedicated enemies of their Homeland. Someone mentioned the Stockholm Syndrome. Another example. A well docummented tendency for hostages to become converts to their captors ideology. The extreme case being Patti Hearst, who started as a hostage of the "Symbionese Liberatrion Army", a complete bunch of nutters, and ended up a Uzi-toting member conducting bank-heists on their behalf.

Altogether, the mere fact that Limbert was a captive of the Iranian regime should in any sensible world render him ineligible for this new post.

Nalman

Does Iran need to bomb and kill our sailors like Israel did in 1967 to the USS Liberty; in order to become our friend? Serious question.

Raymond in DC

Nalman writes, "Does Iran need to bomb and kill our sailors like Israel did in 1967 to the USS Liberty; in order to become our friend?"

Oh, please! Again with the USS Liberty canard. Separate investigations by the US Congress, Defense Department, and NSA have *all* concluded that this attack was a "friendly fire" incident - the ship was mis-identified as Egyptian in the fog of war. Recently declassified Israeli documents covering the Six Day War confirm that. Israel apologized and paid compensation. We all know why people like Nalman can't accept this.

Or perhaps Nalman thinks the US attack on Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan a few years ago, costing many lives, was deliberate too... Heck, the US killed some of their own in recent combat, as Israel itself did in Gaza. Every army puts great emphasis on IFF - identification of friend and foe - but stuff happens.

Charlie

Dixon,

You could have added Stockholm Syndrome which Limbert could suffer from after his being held hostage for almost a year and a half.

You should have added in all those Diplomats, American and British as well lobbying for the Arabs and collecting their "pensions".

John Birch

Dixon: Maybe you should try reading the novel The Manchurian Candidate. In it the secret Communist masquerades as a right winger. Under that scenario, George Bush should be investigated because he did more to embolden Iran than any previous American president.

Penny

In the Iranian issue, it really does not matter how negative you may feel about Israel because it is only the first line of defence.

Ahmadinejad is a 'Twelver'; a cult deemed so wide of the mark that even Khomeini wanted them run out of town - well, worse, really. Ahmadinejad does believe that the return of the 12th Imam is imminent; he is building a road towards the well from which the Mahdi is supposed to emerge; he does have news agencies and telephone hotlines giving out the latest on the Imam's progress. The main concern must be, however, that the Twelvers believe that global carnage has to take place before the Imam can return - and global isn't just Israel, obviously.

Even if you believe Ahmadinejad will be run out of town soon (there are some who think it's possible)the potential fall of Israel to Islamists would still a cause for concern. Those who think a one-state solution is the answer or another form of demise for Israel would soon realise that should that happen, the area would descend into a bloodbath as different Palestinian factions fight for supremacy. The Jews would clearly be for the chop, but don't forget the 20% Arab population of Israel, who would likely be deemed traitors - after all, they could join the Palestinians in either West Bank or Gaza but clearly choose not to.

The psychological boost of a 'win' for Hamas et al would be immense to all Islamists around the globe - as was 9/11. They would certainly believe that Allah has won a vital battle, the wind is at their back and the rest of the world is ripe for the Caliphate. The demise of Israel would, in my view, create more danger, not less.

Marcus

Hi philo, welcome to the crazy world that is the extreme-right blogosphere! In this strange universe Obama is an Indonesian-Kenyan Muslim fanatic with a hot-line to Osama Bin-Laden and a cunning plan to bring down America and turn it into an Islamic state. Gordon Brown is an evil Gramscian intent on introducing Sharia the length and breadth of Europe, and Al Gore is a wicked scam merchant peddling (for reasons yet to be explained) the myth of climate change.None of these theories are, of course, in the slightest way paranoid or deluded.

Adam B.

Derek Blades, France an ally of the US? Are you serious? ( I speak as an American who has lived in France). I can tell you it isn't.

Israel does not hold out a begging bowl, Egypt does, as do any number of US hating hypocrites. Israel gives the US vital intelligence, (the Soviet Sam systems were rendered obsolete by information from Israel - that was pretty important Derek), shares technology, and is a bastion of Western values in the region. In short, Israelis like the US. Egypt gives the US precisely zero, whilst the state press repeatedly broadcasts the most anti-American claptrap. Do you really think the Saudis or Egyptians like the US, or are reliable "allies"? Funny how AIPAC "undermines democracy." How does it do that Derek? And I suppose all the Saudi oil lobbyists don't?

You always have a negative word for Israel, whatever the circumstances. It's boring, Derek.

Adam B.

Nalman, Iranian backed and financed Hizbollah terrorists deliberately ran a truck full of explosives at the US Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, killing 241 Americans. It was the largest single loss of American life since, I believe WW2.

Iran has supplied most of the IED's that are currently killing US soldiers in Iraq and, it is now believed, Afghanistan. They are killing Americans NOW, Nalman - and people like you don't say a word. Instead, you'd rather invent an enemy in Israel than deal with a real one.

Augustus

During the Iron Curtain years Soviet propaganda told the West that the comrades on the other side were happy with their status, and wanted nothing to do with the West and its
'bourgeois' freedoms. But during those November days twenty years ago the free world learned that behind that wall of shame people wanted nothing more than freedom. But unlike the luckier societies now rising to freedom, the populations south and east of the Mediterranean had been oppressed non-stop for centuries
and ignored by the international community during the Cold War. Even as the newly freed communities were shattering the wall and bursting into West Berlin, every imaginable form of oppression was striking Iran and the Arab world. In Sudan, in addition to the horrific genocide, many thousands of Africans were taken into slavery. In Algeria the Berber community was being suppressed. In Mauritania southern blacks were living in servitude. In Egypt Copts were assassinated. In Iraq Kurds were gassed and Shia buried in mass graves. In Iran minorities brutalized and
militant youths terrorized. In Libya dissidents were tortured. The Syrian regime occupied most of Lebanon and massacred thousands of Sunnis. The list is endless. So, as we celebrate the Berlin miracle of the 20th Century, what hope is there for the underdogs of the Middle East and beyond? The US administration, which ran on a slogan of 'hope' is bent on engaging dictatorships and Jihadists, instead of reaching out to the democrats of the region. Having pledged to abandon the struggle for democracy in the Middle East in return for acquiring 'respect'
from the authoritarians, the Obama administration is stubbornly trying to cut deals with oppressive forces. So it makes sense that Obama doesn't attend Berlin's celebrations. He
has no speech to deliver there, because the next wall to be torn down is already being built in the shade of the current US policy.

Augustus

From the Jerusalem Post:
"Ahmadinejad called on the US to chose between Israel and Iran
according to Iranian state media."

Boy! That's going to be a difficult one for this Prince Hamlet.

Dixon

"John Birch
November 11th, 2009 3:25pm
Dixon: Maybe you should try reading the novel The Manchurian Candidate. In it the secret Communist masquerades as a right winger. Under that scenario, George Bush should be investigated because he did more to embolden Iran than any previous American president."

I think your comment raises "missing the point" to its exponent degree.

Dixon

...and BTW, I was referring to the real cases that the novel was based upon, and the books about the psychodynamics of their brainwashing, not a work of fiction, let alone some daft Bush-Derangement-Syndrome flight of fantasy. The Iranian revolution was in 1979. Bush was elected in 2000. Yet you are saying the latter caused the former.

David

Blades rantings are so childish that they are usually best left well alone. This time he’s inadvertently raised the interesting topic of the relationship between Israel and the US although his crippling bias has transformed the topic into a series of sneering accusations about Israel being parasitical and detrimental to US interests. Leaving the buffoonery of those accusations to an aside for a moment, the wider argument is interesting and I thought that other posters might like some context to it.
First, annual US foreign aid currently represents less than 1% of federal spending. Of this, $2.5b goes to Israel and $3.5b goes to other Middle East countries.
Second, the U.S. government, like other governments, pursues its national interests by constructing a network of allies on which it can rely to help counter dangers/risks. An adequate foreign-aid program supports those national interests. Specifically, in Israel’s case:
(a) Israel provides facilities for the storage and maintenance of U.S. matériel for American or Israeli use in a crisis situation at a key location. Should American military forces need to deploy in the Middle East, Israel has strategically located facilities to help support American forces operating in the eastern Mediterranean, the Arabian Peninsula, North Africa, southern Europe, or the Suez Canal.
(b) Israel’s military technology and qualitative advances have contributed importantly to American capabilities. During Desert Storm, the U.S. Air Force successfully relied on Israeli-designed Pioneer unmanned reconnaissance aircraft and Israeli-made conformal fuel tanks that extended the range of its F-15 fighters; in addition, the highly successful Tomahawk cruise missiles included Israeli-made components. Today, the Pentagon is procuring Hunter reconnaissance drones produced by a joint U.S.-Israel partnership for use by the army and marines; American and Israeli scientists are working together to develop the Arrow, one of the world's most advanced tactical anti-missile missiles; and the U.S. Air Force is using Israel's AGM-142 HAVE NAP missile (a highly accurate standoff attack weapon) to enhance the B-52 bombers fleet for conventional missions.
Third, Israel is leading middle east economy whose commercial, finance and technology ties with the US are very strong (Trade between US and Israel is significant - USD$19b of exports to North America and imports of USD$6.3b.
In essence, Israel remains a key regional ally for the US (with clear legal, political and even cultural affinities) because of its strategic importance as a highly advanced economic and military power in a volatile region that is vital to the US.

Penny

David.

At the summer local elections a group of us happened to be standing behind a BNP candidate and overheard some pretty anti-semitic remarks coming from one of them. Specifically; places this particular candidate wouldn't shop because it was 'owned by the kikes'.

Judging by the approximate age of this candidate (probably under-25)it is likely that she owned a mobile phone or that she had a computer with a Pentium chip (I can't remember which particular Pentium chip, but all laptops made since 2000 will have it)It wouldn't surprise me if this candidate used Google and voicemail either. I itched to tap her on the shoulder and ask - and then to tell her that she should immediately bin her phone/laptop etc because they were all developed by the 'kikes' in Israel.

I also understand that two Israelis have invented a device which halves oil consumption by half. This may cause a crisis of conscience for an anti-Israel, Green Party cardholder.

Anyway, there's a fairly good, lighthearted video on YouTube which outlines the technological, medical and other contributions made by Israel which many of us use on a daily basis.

You should find it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saeky9I5T9c

It's worth watching.

David

Penny,

I added the link to "My favourites".... Thanks :-)

Derek BLADES

David, November 12 said that I had "inadvertently raised the interesting topic of the relationship between Israel and the US.."

Nothing inadvertant about it old chap. It was the point of my comment. Maybe you should also ask Father Christmas for a dictionary of the English language.

You tell us that the US puts 2.5 Billion Dollars into the Israeli begging bowl each year. That is about $340 per man, women and child. Not a huge amount but why does Israel need anything at all?

Actually your figure of $2.5 billion is a joke. As a member of the Israeli foreign service you are certainly will aware that substantially more than that amount is regularly given to Israel in the form of military grants. Your figure refers only to civilian aid which is a small part of the picture.

I see you had nothing to say about Netanyahu's blatant attempt to derail President Obama's peace process. I described that as a something you would not expect from an ally. Care to comment?

Adam B.

No Derek Blades, what one would not expect from an ally is pressure to make concessions to groups committed to a genocidal ideology, the path Obama is currently on by pressuring the US' ally Israel in order to appease the enemies of both the US and Israel.

You ask "why does Israel need anything at all" - like you care about America anyway. Well, I would ask "why should the US waste money on various dictatorships around the world like Egypt, (which receives $2 billion, countries whose governments and people usually hate America and give America zero? Israel, and Israelis, are pro-American, overwhelmingly so. You ignore the detailed and excellent posting by David, listing the benefits America receives from Israel. Why don't you address that?

Derek BLADES

Adam B, 13 November, writes "You ignore the detailed and excellent posting by David, listing the benefits America receives from Israel. Why don't you address that?"

David was apparently upset by my reference to a begging bowl. He explained that in return for its annual donation Israel stores US military equipment for use in a crisis by either Israel and the Unitred States and that Israeli scientists have contributed to the development of the United States' weapons of death.

None of this is relevant to the examples I gave of Israel's unfriendly behaviour including military espionage and blocking Obama's efforts to bring peace to the region.

David's "excellent posting" had nothing to say about these matters. It was a silly response to a serious issue.

Adam B.

I see derek Blades - so, having demonstrated that the US does indeed receive a great deal from Israel, you now attack what it receives - i.e. weaponry. Well, how awful the liberal democracies should help each other with defence. Presumeably you have no problem with the Saudi arms trade, which is as corrupt as hell.

That's called "changing the goalposts."

Furthermore, Israel contributes much in the way of mdedicine and science and technology - Israel has more Nobel Prize winners percapita than any other country.

Adam B.

Sorry about the typos!

Syndicate

John Limbert, a former official at the U.S. embassy in Tehran was taken hostage thirty years ago and held for fourteen months. Just great! We now have someone with Stockholm Sydrome leading our efforts to control Iran's nuclear ambitions.