The whole 20 minute drone can be found here, but I’ve snipped out the end where he starts railing against the US for being pissed off that China and Russia vetoed the condemnation of Syria and where, of course, he directly compares this to all those times the US has had to veto revolting anti-Israel resolutions.

The UN is over, go read Melanie Phillips.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/01/29/drone-explodes-inside-secret-israeli-airbase/

An exclusive report from a confidential highly-placed Israeli source says that a booby-trapped drone crashed and exploded at top-secret Israeli airbase…  is the home of the Israeli missile arsenal including its long-range Jerichos capable of striking Iran.  There were civilian and military eyewitnesses to the crash, which happened within the perimeter fence of the facility…

The eyewitnesses and Israel’s wish to avoid pressure to retaliate against the Iranians, necessitated the publication of a media cover story.  The story claims an advanced Israeli drone crashed near the Yesodot moshav..  Israel also claims the drone took off from Tel Nof airbase.  Eyewitnesses may be able to produce video documentation of the precise location of the crash unless it is impounded by the IDF.

The cover story reminds me in crucial ways of a similar one put out by the U.S. when it lost control of its advanced drone inside Iran.  It did everything in its power to make the world believe that the drone crashed by accident and we vehemently denied it was brought down by Iranian electronic warfare capability.  The more we denied the more people believed we were protesting too much.

Though crashing a drone inside Israel would appear to have Iran’s fingerprints all over it (they would certainly have greatest motivation), it’s hard to believe that Iran could fly a drone 1,000 miles with such precision.  So blame will inevitably fall upon Hezbollah, a Syrian-Iranian ally, which often procures its most advanced weaponry from Iran.  Hezbollah would’ve launched the drone from southern Lebanon.  But I find it unlikely it could master the technological know-how to bring this off without Iranian engineering assistance.

There were no Israeli casualties and the drone explosion caused no significant damage at the base.  But the very fact that Iran or its allies have escalated the psychological war of nerves in such a fashion will raise the temperature inside Israel once the true story is known.  It will confirm among the hawks like Bibi, Barak and Bogie Yaalon the imperative to attack Iran.  And the average Israeli man in the street will be that much more accepting of war given this new level of threat.  But the “beauty” (if such a phrase is appropriate) of a drone attack is that, like the Mossad assassination of nuclear scientists, it’s hard to figure out precisely who is to blame for the attack.  In that sense, it raises the temperature, but does so in a carefully calibrated way.

The fact that Israel could not detect such a threat and stop it before it did its damage indicates also some gaps in Israel’s defensive systems.  Admittedly, drones are hard to defend against and Iran/Hezbollah may not have many at their disposal.  But they clearly can do significant damage as we’ve seen from U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan.  Imagine a drone equipped with a warhead (the current one appeared only to be booby-trapped, but not equipped with a warhead or missile) taking aim at the Kirya?  That, of course, would be the next stage of development and one Israel might expect in the not too distant future.  Certainly, a far more sophisticated step than merely crashing a drone into an airbase.  But by no means beyond the realm of possibility for Iranian engineers at some point.

I have always argued that there is a price to pay for Israel’s black ops campaign against Iran.  In this case, the price was very low.  But it will not always be so.  There’s always a price to pay.  The only question is when you’ll have to pay and how much.

So in short, Silverstein wants us to believe that Hizbullah flew a booby-trapped, Iranian-produced drone and exploded it at top-secret Israeli airbase, causing no damage, just for the “ooga booga” effect. And what does he base this on? The supposed word of an anonymous “highly-placed Israeli source” and his own “intuition” (he knows it “in his bones” remember).

Besides the scenario being highly implausible, I’ll remind readers that I have proven how Silverstein does no vetting of his sources, and will eagerly believe something to be true based on little or no fact-checking. In fact, even the ultra-leftist 972 rag rips Silverstein a new one over this latest “scoop”, albeit for different reasons to me.

There are several problems to this story.  According to current news reports, what crashed was Israel’s largest drone “Eitan”. The drone took off from the Tel Nof airbase and crashed between kibbutz Hafetz Haim and the town of Gedera, some ten miles away from the missile base in question, but only two miles from Tel Nof. Two miles and a malfunctioning Israeli drone seem more plausible than 1,000 miles and an ultra-sophisticated enemy aircraft to me, especially as Richard’s source provides no proof whatsoever the aircraft crashed in some location other than the one reported in the media. Ever since the Night of the Gliders Israel has been supremely paranoid about its airspace, with jets scrambling every time an unidentified aircraft comes within a few dozen miles of our borders (you can find several incidents from the past year alone).  A few days ago they nearly scrambled attack a particularly large flock of birds. The idea a foreign aircraft can go in and fly 1,000 miles in broad daylight without detection and crash into one of Israel’s most sensitive military bases is bizarre to say the least.

Richard also notes in his post that “the “beauty” (if such a phrase is appropriate) of a drone attack is that, like the Mossad assassination of nuclear scientists, it’s hard to figure out precisely who is to blame for the attack.  In that sense, it raises the temperature, but does so in a carefully calibrated way.” Wrong. Drones are such complex and still reasonably rare machines it would actually be extremely easy to identify where one comes from. It doesn’t seem likely Iran built a perfect imitation Israeli drone, gave it to Hezbollah to fly it into Israel, and then to have it crashed without causing any real damage.

Finally, eyewitnesses described seeing a typically dual-tailed drone clearly in distress with one wing bursting into flame shortly before impact – not exactly the behaviour of a kamikaze aircraft, manned or unmanned.

But the real question is who would have us believe this highly improbable hypothesis is true. Iran is mostly trying to avoid escalation. Why it would to give Israel a perfect casus belli by launching such a blatant military attack, that causes no significant damage, is beyond me; but I can well imagine plenty of people within the IDF who would dearly like a casus belli to bolster their case for an attack on Iran. If I was Richard, I would be extremely suspicious of any information – especially uncorroborated information – that helps the pro-war camp in Israel; not to mention the source might be acting in good faith, but is being hoodwinked by his own sources within the system..But  it doesn’t seem far fetched someone in the military establishment would be tempted to see Richard’s blog as the perfect channel for a bit of psy-ops.

So there you have it, folks. Yet another old wives tale from the “old wife” blogger (or should that be “Thank you, wife” blogger).

Update: And once again we have proof that despite his claim, Silverstein does not understand Hebrew. From the comments section to the above post:

This is certainly not the first time he’s shown he doesn’t understand the language.

The primary reason for the rift between Iran and Hamas arose after Hamas failed to publicly support Syria’s Bashar al-Assad as protests broke out in the country last March. While it now appears that most of Hamas’ funding comes from Turkey, Iran is still trying to keep its hand in the game. This coming week, Hamas’ Ismail Haniyeh is scheduled to visit Iran.

In what is either propaganda or an attempt by Hamas to please Iran before its trip, Palestine Press, aligned with Fatah, reports that Hamas forces attacked a group of Salafists rallying in support of the Syrian people against Assad’s regime. In addition to the attack, Hamas arrested a Salafi Sheikh, Sheikh Yasser Abu Houli. Attacks against the Salafists by Hamas are not new, however, this one is certainly interesting.

Update: It appears that this report was not propaganda by Fatah’s Palestine Press. Both Walla and Ashraq al-Awsat are reporting that Hamas carried out the attack. Despite carrying out the attack, both say that Hamas secretly supports the Syrian revolution, however, the public nature of the Salafist demonstration forced them to act. In short, Hamas despite supporting the Syrian revolution wants to appear as neutral as possible as the headquarters of their political bureau is still based in Damascus.

Turkish sources reported that Prime Minister of Turkey, Receb Tayyip Erdogan, sent a confidential letter to Ismail Haniyya, Prime Minister of the Hamas-led government in the Gaza Strip, inviting him to visit Turkey, and informing him that he has decided to grant Haniyya’s government $300 Million.

Jonathan Schanzer wrote shortly thereafter:

…this pledge would cover nearly half of Hamas’s reported $769 million budget next year, and would make Turkey its primary benefactor.

Hamas and Turkish officials deny the report, and Hamas probably won’t submit to an external audit any time soon. But let there be no doubt: Hamas is for sale, thanks to the Iranian nuclear program and the Arab Spring.

….With Iran stepping back, could Turkey step in? From publicly clashing with Israeli president Shimon Peres over Israel’s Hamas policy at Davos in 2009 to sponsoring the ill-fated flotilla that attempted to breach Israel’s blockade of Gaza in 2010, Erdogan has become a champion of the Hamas cause.

In recent years, the Turkish government has provided nominal assistance to Hamas in Gaza through a series of charities. Hamas reportedly now operates on Turkish soil, meaning Ankara is already a patron. And Hamas recently announced that leader Ismail Haniyeh plans to visit Turkey soon.

Now, more confirmation of that IMEMC report has arrived. A diplomat was quoted by Reuters today.

“Iran used to give $250 million to $300 million to Hamas but there have been interruptions in the payments in past year. Our understanding is that there has been no payment since August 2011,” he said.

Hamas Gaza Strip leader Ismail Haniyeh was thought to have “received promises from Turkey to provide the movement and his administration with $300 million a year to help Gaza”.

In addition to this Reuters report, Palestinian news sources are reporting that Yediot Ahranot in its Friday paper is reporting that Turkey has agreed to provide Hamas with $300 million.

The Yediot Ahranot article does not appear to be online currently. If it becomes available I will link to it. If anyone has a hard copy and would like to email it, please do.

Update: Haaretz is now running a similar report to Yediot Ahranot. Israel’s Channel 2 is running a very comprehensive report, well worth the read.

Palestine Today and Al-Quds Al-Arabi are reporting that Hamas has denied the reports, as they did with the December report.

Lastly, Shimon Peres in an interview with CNN at Davos said that Hamas was being funded by Turkey.

Update: Turkey has denied the reports.

Officials from Turkey’s Foreign Ministry approached by Today’s Zaman on Sunday denied allegations that Turkey is offering millions of dollars to Hamas, saying that news featuring these allegations was made up and did not reflect the truth.

“There is no cash aid to Hamas, but Turkey is, of course, engaged in projects to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza,” officials said and added, “A $40 million hospital project is one of them, but the construction material for the hospital is not allowed into Gaza.” Turkey frequently complains about an Israeli blockade of Gaza that Israel says is needed to block weapons from reaching Hamas, which Israel considers its archenemy, but which in reality chokes the Gazan economy and keeps Gazans underserved and underdeveloped.

David Kenner, Associate Editor at Foreign Policy noted:

@ChallahHuAkbar It’s unbelievable. I mean, not really their fault, but just unbelievable.

— DavidKenner (@DavidKenner) January 26, 2012

Currently, there are tons of different numbers being thrown around. In mid-December, the UN said the death toll was 5,000. Ten days ago the General Committee of the Syria Revolution said that 6275 people had been killed since March 2011. Another Syrian group says the death toll is above 6,600, while the British Avaaz group says the death toll is above 7,000.

In truth, it is nearly impossible to put an exact number on the number of people killed.

Nonetheless, below is a chart, which outlines the potential death toll based upon a daily average. Note: between today, January 26, and March 15, has been 317 days.

Update: Mahir Zeynalov, a reporter for Today’s Zaman, just tweeted:

Syrian activists say at least 1,317 people killed since Arab monitors arrived, including 30 women, 70 children. 67 were tortured to death.

— Mahir Zeynalov (@MahirZeynalov) January 26, 2012

If this is correct that means that since the Arab League monitors arrived on December 26, ~42-43 people have been killed per day in Syria.

Unsurprisingly, Hamas denied the report saying it was a fabricated story that was a malicious attempt to divide Hamas.

On Monday, Elaph, which seems to be the original source for the story said that it had confirmed that Meshal’s daughter and husband had been arrested, and subsequently released on bail.

As ElderofZiyon notes in his report of the Elaph piece:

The harassment is allegedly to show Syria’s displeasure at Hamas not supporting the Assad regime more strongly. Meshal has been trying to straddle the fence between supporting the Syrian revolution and not upsetting the regime.

Elaph’s sources claim that Meshal’s announcement that he will step down as Hamas’ political leader is related to this pressure from Syria. Elaph says that Syria prefers that he be replaced with his current deputy, Mousa Abu Marzouk.

Despite the confirmation, Hamas has accused Fatah of waging a campaign of incitement and dissemination of false news against the group and its leadership. They are specifically targeting their complaint against the Fatah associated Palestine Press, which ran the story shortly after it appeared on Elaph.

Hamas has called on Fatah to clarify the situation or else they will assume that Mahmoud Abbas has given a green light for the campaign.

Hamas’s threats may have gotten through to Palestine Press as the page with the original story has been removed aside from the headline.

Well, maybe not as Palestine Press is running its own report based on the new Elaph story.

This time, Perry is reporting that Mossad agents posed as CIA agents to recruit Jundallah terrorists to carry out missions in Iran. According to Perry, this happened between 2007 and 2009, the Bush administration was furious about it – but did nothing – and Obama put a stop to it when he took office in 2009…The sources for the story are said to be unnamed, retired CIA officers, plus former Centcom chief Joe Hoar. Hoar is a vehement opponent of Israel (and of American involvement in Iraq, by the way), who cannot even acknowledge that George Marshall opposed recognition of the Jewish state out of anti-Semitism. Make sure you read that entire last link for the context.

Amir Oren of Ha’aretz reported that a senior Israeli government official called the Perry allegations “absolute nonsense,” and characterized Perry as “openly supporting the Arab cause.” This last statement caused full time anti-Israel blogger Richard Silverstein to get his panties in a knot.

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/01/14/israeli-intelligence-source-denies-jundallah-false-flag-story/

But what especially irks me about Oren’s report is that he adds a dig against Perry’s credibility that is gratuitous and deeply insulting.  Interestingly, the insult is only in the Hebrew version (wonder why hmm?) and not the English.  Dimi Reider, in his 972 report notes that Oren calls Perry, an “avowed supporter of the Arab cause.”  His Wikipedia article notes that Perry was an “unofficial” advisor to the PLO until 2004.  How does this fact impeach his reporting on the false flag story?  Because he had some informal involvement with the PLO ending eight years ago, that means he has it in for the Mossad on this story?  C’mon.  That’s bush league stuff.  But unfortunately, this is what Israeli intelligence people and their willing collaborators in the media stoop to.  And I say this as someone who’s admired all of Oren’s previous reporting.

Actually, there is nothing in Perry’s story that would give you the impression he was a pro-Arab partisan (and by the way Mossad source and Mr. Oren, Iranians aren’t Arab, but that’s beside the point).  It is a very carefully reported story that contains no animus whatsoever against Israel, nor any gratuitous partisan statements on Iran’s behalf.

While the story itself is not framed in a way that betrays Perry’s anti-Israel proclivities, one need not look past his Twitter feed to see he contains a great deal of animus against Israel.

Notice his retweeting of Ali Abunimah, the vehemently anti-Israel founder of Electronic Intifada, and his characterizing as tiresome this article which points out Hamas terrorism and lack of acceptance of Israel’s very existence.

In addition, I’ve located this video of Perry downplaying the violence of Hamas and Hizballah, and coming out in favor of dialog with them, as well as with Iran, Syria and the Moslem Brotherhood.

He’s also published a book called Talking To Terrorists.

So contrary to Silverstein’s claims, Mark Perry does seem to have animus against Israel and clearly opposes operations action against Iran. This background is relevant in evaluating his objectivity and the merits of his article.

Update: Commentary Magazine adds the following:

The article’s sourcing is problematic and should also raise red flags. Perry relies on two current intelligence officers, only one of whom has seen the memo alleging Israeli malfeasance. One officer—presumably the same who saw the memo and perhaps also wrote it—describes Bush’s reaction, and so presumably was a briefer for the White House. Should Gen. David Petraeus, director of Central Intelligence, wish to identify that leaker, he could do so easily. In addition, Perry talks to four retired intelligence officials, whose names and positions he also cloaks in anonymity. Allowing these officials a wall of anonymity from behind which to throw mud is problematic as intelligence officials have admitted leaks to advance personal political agendas.

At the very least, Foreign Policy should have printed when the retirees left the service. Retired Defense Intelligence Agency officer W. Patrick Lang​, whose animus toward Israel is pronounced, for example, made a cottage industry during the Iraq war of commenting about matters following his retirement. He neither disclosed his role as a registered Foreign Agent nor the fact that he lacked direct knowledge of much for which he purported to be a source.

Update: Still on topic: here’s a recent commercial  for a cable/tablet package with Israel’s HOT cable channel. It’s not translated, but you can get the jist of it.

But for those who could not make head nor tail of that, my friend Dave Bender has provided this summary:

Four Israeli guys hop over to Isfahan, Iran to meet up with the local Mossad agent, who lays out the deal’s benefits.
Quotes:
On beach: “…God only knows where you can get kosher food here…”
On beach: Dabs on suntan lotion, and defensively says: “What?!? You have any idea how much radiation there is here?…”
One tries operate an app on the tablet, and accidentally blows up the nuke factory in the background, and defensively says… “What?!? – just another ‘mysterious explosion in Iran.’”

Captain Zvi “Zvika” Greengold: “Team Zvika”

Cpt. Greengold commanded a force of three tanks in the Yom Kippur War, when two of them were destroyed in the beginning of the battle. Even when left alone, Greengold continued to fight the Syrian enemy. In order to fool the enemy and make them believe that they were fighting a much larger force, other officers referred to Greengold as the “Zvika Force”. Later in the battle, Greengold was injured, which didn’t stop him from continuing fighting and eventually destroying dozens of enemy tanks. After the war was over, Greengold was awarded the Medal of Valor, the nation’s highest medal for heroism.

Read the rest.

Update: The entire Golan Heights tank battle during the Yom Kippur War is a tale of courage and Divine providence.

AFP/MTV

Rival Lebanese politicians came to blows live on national television over the crisis in neighboring Syria, hurling insults — and chairs — at each other before the show cut to a commercial break.

Fayez Shukr, representing the Baath Party — which has links to Syrian President Bashar Assad’s party of the same name — and opposition MP Mustafa Alloush locked horns over Assad’s credibility in a late night talk show Monday on Lebanon’s MTV station.

“You don’t listen. I wish you would listen to what Assad says,” said Shukr, to which Alloush responded: “I heard him. I don’t believe a word he says.”

“Who are you to believe or not believe him?” Shukr said, prompting Alloush to call Assad a “liar.”

The two then proceeded to hurl insults and swear at one another, before Shukr chucked a glass of water over the talk show host’s head at the MP.

Papers and insults flying, both men then jumped out of their seats and charged at each other, with one picking up a chair as their bewildered host urged them to calm down before the show went off the air

Apparently, the knife at the end of that video was part of a commercial, and not the main event.