If you would like to view my main site ... you can here.  I use this site as a tester for various projects.  The main site has updated news, and column I've written.  I will also be expanding that site as well to function more like a typical news blog.  Thanks for the support.

I don't know how ready you all are to hear this, but it must be said. Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons. At least that's what they say. Until now I've been pretty content in my knowledge that they were lying to the world. Afterall, all of the evidence is there.

--The IAEA has found enriched uranium in Iran that has been enriched beyond the point that is used for energy purposes.

--Iran has been steadfast in its claim that their nuclear program is simply for energy purposes, but they have refused to accept a light-water reactor in exchange for halting enrichment. If you aren't aware ... a heavy-water reactor makes it easier to manufacture nuclear weapons than a light-water reactor.

--Iran has ignored every deadline the UN has imposed, and has refused to allow monitoring.


--Hal G.P. Colebatch reported in July:

Bulgarian border guards seized a British truck carrying radioactive material ... to the Iranian military ... that could have been used to make a "dirty" nuclear bomb. After a scanner showed it had radiation levels 200 times normal, the truck was found to be carrying ten lead-lined boxes addressed to the Iranian Ministry of Defense.

The head of the Bulgarian Nuclear Regulatory Agency, Nikolai Todorov, said he was shocked that devices containing so much nuclear material could be sold so easily: "The devices are highly radioactive -- if you had another 90 of them you would be able to make an effective dirty bomb." That meant if nine similar loads got through.

"Americum-beryllium is an extremely effective element for the construction of a dirty bomb as it has a very long half-life....It is found mainly in spent reactor-fuel elements and it is not at all easy to get hold of. I find it hard to believe it is so easily available ..."


Perhaps this was an isolated case ... perhaps not. The article continues:


If this was a one-off incident, it would be a bad enough indictment of the present British Government. In fact it is only the latest of a series.

On August 31, 2005, a truck carrying 1,000 kg of zirconium silicate was stopped by Bulgarian authorities at the border with Turkey. The Bulgarians, detecting unusual radioactivity levels, discovered the truck was owned by a British firm, and alerted the British Embassy, which informed London on September 7. Although the trade in zirconium is meant to be tightly controlled, the truck had traveled through Britain, Germany and Romania without being stopped. The British authorities maintained there was nothing illegal about the shipment, and it was eventually allowed to proceed.

John Large, an independent nuclear consultant, said: "Zirconium is used for two purposes: for cladding nuclear fuel rods inside a reactor and as material for a nuclear weapon."

The bottom line was that a British firm had been allowed to sell highly-dangerous radioactive material to Iran without scrutiny by the British authorities, and then within a few months something very similar happened again, either in bizarre obeisance to some bureaucratic legalism, or because no one cared.

Previously, in May 1999, Bulgarian customs officers trained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection discovered highly-enriched Uranium U-235 concealed in an air-compressor in the trunk of a car at a border-crossing checkpoint. It was believed this was a sample to show prospective buyers.


Who would have thought that Bulgaria would be such an astute ally in keeping nuclear weapons from America's enemies? With all of this as evidence ... it sure seems conclusive that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons ... right? Wait until you read what I have next.


The following are excerpts from an interview with Mohammad Sa'idi, International Affairs Deputy in the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization, which aired on the Iranian News Channel (IRINN) on August 27, 2006.

Interviewer: You just said that in some cases, heavy water can even be used for drinking.

Mohammad Sa'idi: Yes.

Interviewer: Could you elaborate on this?

Mohammad Sa'idi: One of the products of heavy water is depleted deuterium. As you know, in an environment with depleted deuterium, the reception of cancer cells and of the AIDS viruses is disrupted. Since this reception is disrupted, the cells are gradually expelled from the body. Obviously, one glass of depleted deuterium will not expel or cure the cancer or eliminate the AIDS. We are talking about a certain period of time. In many countries that deal with these diseases, patients use this kind of water instead of regular water, and consume it daily in order to heal their diseases.

In other words, the issue of heavy water has to do with matters of life and death, in many cases. One of the reasons that led us to produce heavy water was to use it for agricultural... medical purposes, and especially for industrial purposes in our country.


(Insert record scratch noise here)


Did he just say what I think he said? That Iran wants a heavy-water reactor so they can drink deuterium water in an effort to cure cancer and AIDS? He also said that many countries use this method as a treatment for said diseases. I am dying to know which countries drink deuterium water to combat cancer and AIDS. Sa'idi mentioned agricultural uses for heavy-water ... tomacco anyone?


Mohammad Sa'idi: You may ask why we pursued a heavy-water research reactor, rather than a light-water reactor. This is a [legitimate] question, which deserves an answer. Since this involves simpler technology, the heavy-water research reactors have slightly simpler technology. Heavy water is currently produced at Khondab in Arak, so this technology is readily available to us. All we need to do is build the reactor. The fuel is available, and so is the moderator and the cooler, so the reactor can become productive very quickly.


So Iran wants to build a heavy-water reactor because the technology is already available to Iran. This is really great news for Iran ... because they want to cure cancer and AIDS anyway. It's a win win situation. I do have one question though. Iran is saying that they are developing a heavy-water reactor because this is the technology available to them ... right? Then why did they turn down the light-water reactors that the west has offered to give them more than once? Oh yeah ... to cure cancer and AIDS ... I forgot. This next part is very interesting.


Interviewer: When do you think we will reach 3,000 [centrifuges]?

Mohammad Sa'idi: According to the plan.

Interviewer: Thank you. I had other questions We have done all these activities, so why aren't we building a [nuclear] power plant?

Mohammad Sa'idi: Of course we are. One of the important issues that may arise in the future for our dear people is that in order to complete this technological process in the Islamic Republic of Iran, we have begun designing a power reactor for the production of electricity. When I say power, I mean production of electricity. This is a power reactor with a capacity of 360 mega-watt. We are working towards an Iranian-made reactor. Adjacent to the heavy-water reactor that we are building, and which is also Iranian-made, we are planning a light-water power reactor with a capacity of 360 mega-watt, which will serve as a basis for construction of [other] power reactors in the future.


Now Iran is saying that it is planning a light-water reactor ... even though Sa'idi just said that they didn't have the technology available to them? Is it just me, or did Sa'idi just pull out a big ol' can of hypocracy? Remember, heavy-water makes it easier to develop nuclear weapons. Why would you say that you are developing heavy-water because you don't have light-water technology, and then turn that technology down when it's offered? Why would you say you are "working toward" a light-water reactor ... when you just stated that you don't have the technological capability? Is it because you truly want to cure cancer and AIDS ... or because you are developing the bomb? The answer seems pretty clear to me ... then again:


TEHRAN, Sept. 6 (UPI):

Iran's Ministry of Health claimed to have made a medical breakthrough with a formula to control symptoms of AIDS.

The state-controlled IRNA news agency quoted an unidentified ministry employee as saying, "The research studies to find out a formula to cure AIDS was initiated during the tenure of two former health ministers and have led to useful results."

Former Minister of Health and Medical Education Dr. Mohammad Farhadi said the chemical and herbal treatment appeared effective on other immune disorders as well.

"The theory was to determine whether or not it is possible to boost the immunity system of the body. Some 60 projects were initiated to attain the result," Farhadi said in the IRNA report.

The announcement came a day before an international meeting to discuss U.N. sanctions against Iran for refusing to curtail the enrichment of uranium or allow its monitoring.


Casey Hendrickson

Sept. 1, 2006 

20 Cease-Fire Violations

UN Security Council Resolution 1701 is a pretty simple document that established a cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel to hopefully end the recent conflict. Most of us knew the cease-fire wouldn't hold, and many of us pressed for Israel to just finish it already. Unfortunately international pressure, and a far too optimistic military doctrine, saw Israel accept yet another UN resolution directly linked to the safety of that country. If 1701 fails like the Taif Agreement and UN resolution 1559 has failed for all of these years, there will be more war.

Many of us expected there to be a violation, or two, of the new cease-fire resolution. We also expected that at some point Israel would respond to violations, and thus be blamed themselves for those violations. Well, violating 1701 didn't take very long, and we were proven correct that Israel would get the blame.

Here's what the AP had to say:

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Saturday that an early-morning Israeli raid against Hezbollah in eastern Lebanon violated the 6-day-old cease-fire brokered by the United Nations. An Israeli officer was killed, and two soldiers wounded, when Israeli commandos raided a Hezbollah stronghold deep in Lebanon.

It only took six days for Israel to violate the cease-fire, and draw Kofi Annan out to criticize their conduct. That's almost a record. The problem here is that this wasn't the first violation of 1701 it's the nineteenth! This is, however, the first violation by Israel. Since this was the nineteenth violation in six days, and the first by Israel, where's Kofi 'hell no' Annan been? Since this event there has been another violation of 1701, and there will no doubt be more. So what exactly does 1701 say, and what are the other violations I'm writing about?

I won't bore you with the full text of UN resolution 1701, but you can confirm the excerpts I use from it on the UN's own website. The opening paragraphs of the resolution recalls all previous resolutions on Lebanon, squarely puts the blame on Hezbollah, says there will be no weapons in Lebanon without the consent of the Lebanese government, no authority other than the Lebanese government, calls for a larger UNIFIL force, the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers, and other things as well. Even though the UN recalled all previous resolutions on Lebanon, it calls for 1701 to implement what those resolutions failed to.

Violation 1 & 2:
By STEVEN R. HURST - Aug 14
The truce that took effect at 8 a.m. (1 a.m. EDT) largely held through its first day, although six Hezbollah fighters were killed in skirmishes between Israeli forces and Hezbollah that illustrated the fragility of the cease-fire.

I've actually given a pass to Hezbollah here. In two separate skirmishes, Hezbollah moved aggressively towards Israeli positions sparking a firefight. There is a long history of battles and skirmishes happening right after an end to hostilities. Nevertheless, a violation is a violation, and Hezbollah racked up two here. The first provision of 1701 is pretty clear.

1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

Hezbollah launched two attacks, and Israel's response was defensive not offensive. Hezbollah 2, Israel 0.

Violation 3-6:
Daniel McGrory - Aug 15
It was supposed to be the day the maligned Lebanese army took control of the country's borders and policed the UN ceasefire.
Instead, the military commanders were left humiliated and troops stranded as Hezbollah told them not to disarm its fighters.
The first infantry units were preparing to head south when Hezbollah showed who controls the area by announcing it would not surrender its weapons.

General Michel Sleiman, commander-in-chief of the Lebanese army, and his lieutenants had been invited to join cabinet meetings to finalise plans to deploy the 15,000-strong force south of the Litani River. But they were lectured by Hezbollah's two ministers in the coalition Government on what the army could and could not do.

Very interesting. Remember, 1701 says that NO arms are allowed without consent of the Lebanese government. There is actually several violations here. Some of the provisions of 1701 that prove these are, in fact, violations of the cease-fire are as follows:

2. Upon full cessation of hostilities, calls upon the Government of Lebanon and UNIFIL as authorized by paragraph 11 to deploy their forces together throughout the South. (Hezbollah didn't allow Lebanon to deploy 1 violation)

3. Emphasizes the importance of the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory in accordance with the provisions of resolution 1559 (2004) and resolution 1680 (2006), and of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, for it to exercise its full sovereignty, so that there will be no weapons without the consent of the Government of Lebanon and no authority other than that of the Government of Lebanon; (under those resolutions, Hezbollah should not exist nor should they have weapons 2 violations)

5. Also reiterates its strong support, as recalled in all its previous relevant resolutions, for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized borders, as contemplated by the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement of 23 March 1949;

7. Affirms that all parties are responsible for ensuring that no action is taken contrary to paragraph 1 that might adversely affect the search for a long-term solution. (technically another violation, but we'll count it with number 3 above)

8. Calls for Israel and Lebanon to support a permanent ceasefire and a long-term solution based on the following principles and elements: (not all listed)

-- full implementation of the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and of resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), that require the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon, so that, pursuant to the Lebanese cabinet decision of 27 July 2006, there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese State;

-- no foreign forces in Lebanon without the consent of its Government; (we know that Iranian Hezbollah forces joined Lebanon's Hezbollah force, and I doubt they've left 1 violation)

In case you're new to this debate, the Taif Accords and UN resolution 1559 say that Hezbollah is not allowed to exist, and it is illegal for them to still be an organization. Hezbollah 6, Israel 0.

Violation 7:
The two kidnapped Israeli soldiers still have not been returned to Israel.

The opening paragraphs of 1701 clearly call for their return in the following excerpt:

-- Emphasizing the need for an end of violence, but at the same time emphasizing the need to address urgently the causes that have given rise to the current crisis, including by the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers. Hezbollah 7, Israel 0.

Violations 8-18:
AP Aug 14
Highlighting the fragility of the peace, Hezbollah guerrillas fired at least 10 Katyusha rockets that landed in southern Lebanon early Tuesday, the Israeli army said, adding that nobody was injured. The army said that none of the rockets, which were fired over a two-hour period, had crossed the border and so it had not responded.

If you read 1701, it's pretty clear that each rocket is a violation of the resolution and cease-fire. Remember the very first provision?

1. Calls for a full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations;

We have ten rockets, which equals ten hostile acts, which equals ten violations of UN security council resolution 1701. Hezbollah 18, Israel 0.

Violation 19:
AP
An Israeli officer was killed, and two soldiers wounded, when Israeli commandos raided a Hezbollah stronghold deep in Lebanon, resulting in a fierce gunbattle.

Israel said the raid was launched to stop arms smuggling from Iran and Syria to the militant Shiite fighters, while Lebanon's Prime Minister Fuad Saniora called the operation a "flagrant violation" of the U.N. truce.

This is the one that Kofi 'hell no' Annan chose to respond to. He openly condemned Israel for their strike, which technically IS a violation of 1701, but ignored the previous eighteen violations by Hezbollah. I'd also like to point out that Kofi accused Israel of deliberately attacking a UNIFIL base, but said nothing when Hezbollah attacked a UNIFIL base. Since 1701 calls for Israel to stop all offensive operations we have to give them one point whether we support them or not, just to be fair. Hezbollah 18, Israel 1.

Violation 20:
Fox News (AP contributing) Aug 25
"It is generally accepted that the disarmament of Hezbollah cannot be done by force," Annan told reporters. "The troops are not going there to disarm Hezbollah, let's be clear on that."

Wait a minute! UN security council resolution 1701 calls for the implementation of the Taif Accords, 1559, and 1680 under the new resolution. UNIFIL has been in southern Lebanon since 1978. Their mission is defined as, and confirmed on the UN's website as follows:

The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, was created by the United Nations, with the adoption of Security Council Resolution 425 and 426 on 19 March 1978, to confirm Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, restore the international peace and security, and help the Lebanese Government restore its effective authority in the area.

Defenddemocracy.org writes:

During the 28 years that UNIFIL was supposed to be restoring sovereignty to the government of Lebanon, Hezbollah was created, set up an autonomous statelet in southern Lebanon, acquired tens of thousands of rockets and missiles, and launched numerous terrorist assaults against Israel.

Even though Israel complied with its obligation to leave southern Lebanon, UNIFIL failed to bring about the remainder of its mandate. As a result, Hezbollah filled the void in southern Lebanon left by the absence of Israeli troops.

Why won't the UN implement its own resolutions? How is the UN going to help Lebanon restore its effective authority in the area if they won't disarm Hezbollah according to their own mandate? What possible effect could the new beefed up UNIFIL force have if they are not willing to disarm Hezbollah? When Hezbollah violates the cease-fire again, in yet another attempt to get Samir Kuntar back, will UNIFIL engage them? If Hezbollah and Lebanese forces get into a confrontation, will UNIFIL assist Lebanon? Perhaps they'll assist Hezbollah instead.

Lori Lowenthal Marcus - Weekly Standard

DURING THE RECENT month-long war between Hezbollah and Israel, U.N. "peacekeeping" forces made a startling contribution: They openly published daily real-time intelligence, of obvious usefulness to Hezbollah, on the location, equipment, and force structure of Israeli troops in Lebanon.

UNIFIL--the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, a nearly 2,000-man blue-helmet contingent that has been present on the Lebanon-Israel border since 1978--is officially neutral. Yet, throughout the recent war, it posted on its website for all to see precise information about the movements of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers and the nature of their weaponry and materiel, even specifying the placement of IDF safety structures within hours of their construction. New information was sometimes only 30 minutes old when it was posted, and never more than 24 hours old.

Meanwhile, UNIFIL posted not a single item of specific intelligence regarding Hezbollah forces.

Is anyone really surprised? UNIFIL was created to prevent groups in southern Lebanon from launching terrorist attacks on Israel, and to make sure all Israeli forces pulled out. They only accomplished one of their mandates while allowing another to go unchecked. As a result, we have several years of attacks on Israel by Hezbollah. This last incident is just the latest in a long history of offensives by Hezbollah to kidnap Israelis in order to seek a prisoner exchange.

1701 also states:

11. Decides, in order to supplement and enhance the force in numbers, equipment, mandate and scope of operations, to authorize an increase in the force strength of UNIFIL to a maximum of 15,000 troops, and that the force shall, in addition to carrying out its mandate under resolutions 425 and 426 (1978):

(a) Monitor the cessation of hostilities;

(b) Accompany and support the Lebanese armed forces as they deploy throughout the South, including along the Blue Line, as Israel withdraws its armed forces from Lebanon as provided in paragraph 2;

(e) Assist the Lebanese armed forces in taking steps towards the establishment of the area as referred to in paragraph 8;

(f) Assist the Government of Lebanon, at its request, to implement paragraph 14;

12. Acting in support of a request from the Government of Lebanon to deploy an international force to assist it to exercise its authority throughout the territory, authorizes UNIFIL to take all necessary action in areas of deployment of its forces and as it deems within its capabilities, to ensure that its area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities of any kind, to resist attempts by forceful means to prevent it from discharging its duties under the mandate of the Security Council, and to protect United Nations personnel, facilities, installations and equipment, ensure the security and freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, humanitarian workers and, without prejudice to the responsibility of the Government of Lebanon, to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence;

13. Requests the Secretary-General urgently to put in place measures to ensure UNIFIL is able to carry out the functions envisaged in this resolution. New score: Hezbollah 18, Israel 1, United Nations 1.

Hezbollah has three demands of Israel.

- Cease to exist.
- Release all Lebanese, Palestinian, and terrorist prisoners
- Give Shebaa Farms to Lebanon.

All of these demands are unreasonable. 1701, however, does state that the Shebaa Farms issue must be addressed by Kofi Annan within thirty days with the following provision:

10. Requests the Secretary-General to develop, in liaison with relevant international actors and the concerned parties, proposals to implement the relevant provisions of the Taif Accords, and resolutions 1559 (2004) and 1680 (2006), including disarmament, and for delineation of the international borders of Lebanon, especially in those areas where the border is disputed or uncertain, including by dealing with the Shebaa Farms area, and to present to the Security Council those proposals within thirty days;

If Kofi Annan doesn't address Shebaa Farms within thirty days the UN will have violated its own resolution more than Israel.

UPDATE:

Via Drudge

The fighting between Israel and Hezbollah began after two Israeli soldiers were captured by the Islamic militant group. On Wednesday, a Hezbollah cabinet minister said that the guerrilla group will not release the two captured Israeli soldiers unconditionally, and that they would only be freed in a prisoner exchange.

"There will be no unconditional release. This is not possible," Minister of Energy and Hydraulic Resources Mohammed Fneish said in Beirut. He is one of two Hezbollah members in Lebanon's Cabinet.

"There should be an exchange through indirect negotiations. This is the principle to which Hezbollah and the resistance are adhering," he said.

Remember that after Hezbollah launched Operation Truthful Promise this July 12, and kidnapped the IDF soldiers, they called for a prisoner exchange which was officially rejected by Olmert. If they get the prisoner exchange they desired in the first place you can officially label this a victory for Hezbollah over Israel. If Israel caves, and agrees to a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah, everything they did was in vain. The deaths that resulted on all sides would be for nothing.

I'll leave it up to you if this counts as another violation of 1701 by Hezbollah. However, since the Minister of Energy and Hydraulic Resources is a legitimate member of Lebanon's government, I am left with one conclusion. New score: Hezbollah 18, Israel 1, United Nations 1, Lebanon 1.

UPDATE 2:

Aug 30, 2006

Haaretz Service and News Agencies

United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Tuesday that Israel was responsible for most of the violations of the UN-brokered cease-fire that ended the 34-day conflict between Israel and Hezbollah two weeks ago.

Really? Let's refer back to exhibit A, shall we? The current scorecard for violations sits at: Hezbollah 18, Israel 1, United Nations 1, Lebanon 1. The defense rests.

When Israel launched its raid in Lebanon after the cease-fire they drew critisism from Kofi Annan who had remained silent in the midst of other violations.

"The Secretary-General is deeply concerned about a violation by the Israeli side of the cessation of hostilities as laid out in Security Council resolution 1701," a statement issued by Annan's spokesperson said.

He's deeply concerned about A violation on ISRAEL'S side. Perhaps he should be concerned about the violations on the terrorist's side, or better yet, his own.

Casey Hendrickson

A month or so ago there was a fairly dramatic drop in the price of gas throughout the country. I hadnt planned on discussing oil prices that day, but as I drove to work I noticed that the price of gas here in Vegas dropped by 30 cents. Given the recent drop in the price of oil, by $2.00 per barrel, I figured I would share some excerpts from my monologue that day. Its a bit animated at times, but was all done in good fun.

How dare they! How dare the oil companies betray their shareholders! How dare they betray the average American who has spent tens, hundreds, thousands of dollars investing in their companies in hopes of making a modest profit! How dare they turn their backs on our teachers whose retirement benefits depend on their investments in oil! Without oil invesments our retired teachers will be eating dog food, and going without their medications! Shame! Shame on big oil!

Folks, I know these are trying times. I know this is going to be difficult for you to hear. Alas, in the interest of fairness I must say what Im about to say. On my way to work I noticed something astounding. The average price of gas around the valley today is 30 cents less than it was yesterday. Dont they realize what thats going to do to poor Mrs. Johnsons retirement plan?

This story is buried! No one is talking about it. Its a coverup! A conspiracy! I want to know who knew about the price dip, and when did they know it! I demand an independent investigation from a non-partisan oversight committee! Big oil only makes 9 cents profit per dollar, and drivers are getting a 30 cent refund? Theyre leaving shareholders wide open to virtual poverty. This is the evil doing of George W. Bush! This is all Bushs fault! He and his big oil, price fixing buddies. How dare you George Bush. How dare you!

I hope you liked my meager attempt to draw attention to such an issue. Go on hating the oil companies that fund numerous retirement accounts. While your at it ask those same people how much they like welfare. Take away their investments, and whats left is government assistance.

Next time you go to fill up at the pump, and find yourself angry at big oil for high gas prices - its okay. Just remember that when gas prices fall you should thank big oil too. If you believe that big oil is responsible for high gas prices then you must accept they are responsible for lower gas prices as well. Therefore, treat them equally. I sent my thank you letter to Exxon just the other day.

I am a talk show host on the number one talk station in Las Vegas, NV. I do a show six days a week. Monday-Friday I am on the air between 6-8pm, and on Saturdays I am on between 10am-1pm. Since Saturdays give me more time to really dive into an issue; I typically save a special topic for my weekend audience. Given the current situation with Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah I decided to take a few days over a couple of weeks to introduce my audience to the parties involved. Most people in the world, and especially in the US, don't understand what exactly is happening right now or why. Since modern history is often debated between the two sides heatedly, I decided to go back in time to the inception of each one. One week I gave the complete history of Hamas, the next week Hezbollah, and finally the complete history of the land of Israel all the way back to 200,000 BC. I did this so that no one could deny who was the original inhabitants of the land of Israel. I have never had a more popular series of topics on my program, and receive numerous requests for the information every day.

This brings me to why I'm writing this today. I will not bore you with the great details of those three shows, but I want to answer a fundamental question that many of you out there seem to have. You see, I've already told my audience why Hezbollah attacked Israel. Yet, not one person out there has been able to explain it to the masses. The LA Times this last week is just now getting close to what I exposed when the conflict broke out. Frankly, I'm tired of watching CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc. fumble around with these so called "experts" to explain why Hezbollah attacked Israel. Talk radio is not doing any better. It seems like everyday a new pundit is paraded in front of us, only to miss the point yet again.

The other day I was listening to the Radio Factor, and Bill O'Reilly introduced a man he touted as being in the "top five" in the world on terrorism. This retired Colonel, advertising his new book, seemed like a very intelligent and knowledgeable man. However, what he said stunned me. He was asked why Hezbollah attacked Israel when it did. The response: "They were copying Hamas." I could not believe that I actually just heard those words. No wonder everyone is confused. To be fair, terrorism is a massive field to study, and most "experts" have a particular field of expertise. The theory that Iran ordered Hezbollah to attack in order to divert attention away from the nuclear issue was a better theory than Hezbollah copying Hamas, but still wrong.

Perhaps I'm being a little mean, and even a little stuck up. If I am, I apologize, but my reasoning is sound. The answer is simple and very clear. Hezbollah is only doing what it has always done, and had promised to do. The reason Hezbollah attacked Israel is - Samir Kuntar. You see, in October of 2000, Hezbollah attacked Israel and abducted three IDF soldiers in order to secure the release of fourteen Lebanese prisoners. Samir Kuntar among them. A prisoner exchange was not arranged until January 2004. This was too long a wait for Hezbollah, so they executed the three IDF soldiers. They also launched several attacks, and kidnapped more Israelis in order to force Israel into a prisoner exchange.

January 29, 2004 the prisoner exchange finally took place. A total of 30 Lebanese and Arab prisoners, the remains of 60 Lebanese militants and civilians, 420 Palestinian prisoners, and maps showing Israeli mines in South Lebanon were exchanged for an Israeli businessman and army reserve colonel kidnapped in 2001 and the remains of the three IDF soldiers kidnapped and executed in 2000. Where were the cries of disproportionality then? There was a problem, however, Samir Kuntar was not amongst the prisoners to be exchanged. Hezbollah had vowed to get Samir Kuntar back, but failed.

On November 21, 2005 Hezbollah launched an attack along the entire border with Israel which was supposed to provide tactical cover for an attempt by a squad of Hezbollah special forces to abduct Israeli troops in the Israeli side of the village of Al-Ghajar. In order to again force Israel into prisoner negotiations. The attack failed when an ambush by IDF paratroopers killed four Hezbollah members and scattered the rest. Hezbollah would attack Israel again one month later in Kiryat Shmona.

Having failed to get Samir Kuntar back in 2004, and the subsequent failures to kidnap more Israelis in 2005, Hassan Nasrallah declared that Hezbollah would carry out further operations at a later date to gain the release of Samir Kuntar and others. July 12, 2006 they made good on their promise with Operation Truthful Promise (a telling name isn't it). The operation killed eight IDF soldiers, and saw two others kidnapped. That's where we are today. There is no great mystery as to why Hezbollah attacked. They certainly aren't copying Hamas. They've been using the same tactic since Israel pulled out of Lebanon in 2000. In fact, after Operation Truthful Promise, Hezbollah immediately called for negotiations for a prisoner exchange hoping Israel would be preoccupied with Hamas. Hassan Nasrallah has since admitted on Al Jazeera that he did not anticipate Israel's response.

So who is the man Hezbollah wants back so bad? Samir Kuntar is a Lebanese terrorist who was convicted, and sentenced to four life terms in prison for the murder of four Israelis in 1979. Kuntar got into a shootout with Israeli police, and killed two of them. One victim was a 28 year old man Kuntar had taken hostage along with his daughter. That man's 4 year old daughter would be the fourth of Kuntar's victims. What's truly disturbing about the latter was not that she was murdered by Samir Kuntar at all, but how he did it. After he murdered her father in front of her he put her head on a rock, and smashed it with the butt of his rifle. He has admitted numerous times to the murders, and has expressed pride in them. Just in case you don't believe one man could possibly drive Hezbollah to commit these acts, I have more for you.

In 2003 Israel agreed to exchange 400 prisoners with Hezbollah for an Israeli businessman, and the bodies of those three IDF soldiers Hezbollah executed. Remember, the exchange didn't happen until 2004. Hassan Nasrallah refused unless Samir Kuntar was among them. 400 Lebanese prisoners weren't as important to Hezbollah as Samir Kuntar? Israel then agreed to release Samir Kuntar IF Hezbollah provided solid proof of the fate of Ron Arad, an air force pilot missing in Lebanon since 1986. Hezbollah never provided any details about Arad, so Israel still holds Kuntar, and Hezbollah is still kidnapping Israelis trying to get this one man back.

 

Casey Hendrickson

 

 

 

 

You are a Social Moderate (56% permissive) and an... Economic Conservative (80% permissive) You are best described as a: Capitalist Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test