[geekWithA.45]

from Link (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030115-035849-6156r)

My comment:

Not acceptable. Even if they're only targetting the bad guys. This sort of thing makes the whole notion of innocent until proven guilty and the rule of law a joke.



-----------------------------------------

Israel to kill in U.S., allied nations
By Richard Sale
UPI Intelligence Correspondent
From the Washington Politics & Policy Desk
Published 1/15/2003 4:50 PM
View printer-friendly version


Israel is embarking upon a more aggressive approach to the war on terror that will include staging targeted killings in the United States and other friendly countries, former Israeli intelligence officials told United Press International.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has forbidden the practice until now, these sources said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The Israeli statements were confirmed by more than a half dozen U.S. foreign policy and intelligence officials in interviews with UPI.

With the appointment of Meir Dagan, the new director Israel's Mossad secret intelligence service, Sharon is also preparing "a huge budget" increase for the spy agency as part of "a tougher stance in fighting global jihad (or holy war)," one Israeli official said.

Since Sharon became Israeli prime minister, Tel Aviv has mainly limited its practice of targeted killings to the West Bank and Gaza because "no one wanted such operations on their territory," a former Israeli intelligence official said.

Another former Israeli government official said that under Sharon, "diplomatic constraints have prevented the Mossad from carrying out 'preventive operations' (targeted killings) on the soil of friendly countries until now."

He said Sharon is "reversing that policy, even if it risks complications to Israel's bilateral relations."

A former Israeli military intelligence source agreed: "What Sharon wants is a much more extensive and tough approach to global terrorism, and this includes greater operational maneuverability."

Does this mean assassinations on the soil of allies?

"It does," he said.

"Mossad is definitely being beefed up," a U.S. government official said of the Israeli agency's budget increase. He declined to comment on the Tel Aviv's geographic expansion of targeted killings.

An FBI spokesman also declined to comment, saying: "This is a policy matter. We only enforce federal laws."

A congressional staff member with deep knowledge of intelligence matters said, "I don't know on what basis we would be able to protest Israel's actions." He referred to the recent killing of Qaed Salim Sinan al Harethi, a top al Qaida leader, in Yemen by a remotely controlled CIA drone.

"That was done on the soil of a friendly ally," the staffer said.

But the complications posed by Israel's new policy are real.

"Israel does not have a good record at doing this sort of thing," said former CIA counter-terrorism official Larry Johnson.

He cited the 1997 fiasco where two Mossad agents were captured after they tried to assassinate Khaled Mashaal, a Hamas political leader, by injecting him with poison.

According to Johnson, the attempt, made in Amman, Jordan, caused a political crisis in Israeli-Jordan relations. In addition, because the Israeli agents carried Canadian passports, Canada withdrew its ambassador in protest, he said. Jordan is one of two Arab nations to recognize Israel. The other is Egypt.

At the time, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said, "I have no intention of stopping the activities of this government against terror," according to a CNN report.

Former CIA officials say Israel was forced to free jailed Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmad Yassin and 70 other Jordanian and Palestinian prisoner being held in Israeli jails to secure the release of the two would-be Mossad assassins.

Phil Stoddard, former director of the Middle East Institute, cited a botched plot to kill Ali Hassan Salemeh, the mastermind of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre. The 1974 attempt severely embarrassed Mossad when the Israeli hit team mistakenly assassinated a Moroccan waiter in Lillehammer, Norway.

Salemeh, later a CIA asset, was killed in Beirut, Lebanon, in 1976 by a car bomb placed by an Israeli assassination team, former U.S. intelligence officials said.

"Israel knew Salemeh was providing us with preventive intelligence on the Palestinians and his being killed pissed off a lot of people," said a former senior CIA official.

But some Israeli operations have been successful.

Gerald Bull, an Ontario-born U.S. citizen and designer of the Iraqi supergun -- a massive artillery system capable of launching satellites into orbit, and of delivering nuclear chemical or biological payloads from Baghdad to Israel -- was killed in Belgium in March 1990. The killing is still unsolved, but former CIA officials said a Mossad hit team is the most likely suspect.

Bull worked on the supergun design -- codenamed Project Babylon -- for 10 years, and helped the Iraqis develop many smaller artillery systems. He was found with five bullets in his head outside his Brussels apartment.

Israeli hit teams, which consist of units or squadrons of the Kidon, a sub-unit for Mossad's highly secret Metsada department, would stage the operations, former Israeli intelligence sources said. Kidon is a Hebrew word meaning "bayonet," one former Israeli intelligence source said.

This Israeli government source explained that in the past Israel has not staged targeted killings in friendly countries because "no one wanted such operations on their territory."

This has become irrelevant, he said.

Dagan, the new hard-driving director of Mossad, will implement the new changes, former Israeli government officials said.

Dagan, nicknamed "the gun," was Sharon's adviser on counter-terrorism during the government of Netanyahu in 1996, former Israeli government officials say. A former military man, Dagan has also undertaken extremely sensitive diplomatic missions for several of Israel's prime ministers, former Israeli government sources said.

Former Israel Defense Forces Lt. Col. Gal Luft, who served under Dagan, described him as an "extremely creative individual -- creative to the point of recklessness."

A former CIA official who knows Dagan said the new Mossad director knows "his foreign affairs inside and out," and has a "real killer instinct."

Dagan is also "an intelligence natural" who has "a superb analyst not afraid to act on gut instinct," the former CIA official said.

Dagan has already removed Mossad officials whom he regards as "being too conservative or too cautious" and is building up "a constituency of senior people of the same mentality," one former long-time Israeli operative said.

Dagan is also urging that Mossad operatives rely less on secret sources and rely more on open information that is so plentifully provided on the Internet and newspapers.

"It's a cultural thing," one former Israeli intelligence operative explained. "Mossad in the past has put its emphasis on Humint (human intelligence) and secret operations and has neglected the whole field of open media, which has become extremely important."

Regarding Mossad's new policy and budget increase, Kim Farber an Israeli Embassy official said, "There is so little information available on this, there is nothing I can add."

Copyright © 2001-2003 United Press International

View printer-friendly version

[JerryN]

And also interesting is the question of Rule of Law versus Rule Of War.

Is assasination in this case part of war? When the Marines see bad guys in Afghanistan they don't capture them, put em on trial and then kill them. They just shoot them.

[geekWithA.45]

Interesting if its true...
And also interesting is the question of Rule of Law versus Rule Of War.

Is assasination in this case part of war? When the Marines see bad guys in Afghanistan they don't capture them, put em on trial and then kill them. They just shoot them.



There's a difference between a battlefield, and our streets.

There's also the small difference of soldiers, who can surrender, actively shooting at each other, and terrorists plotting their plots.

When they plot, they are subject to arrest.

When they put their plot into motion, the normal rules of self defense apply, and they're dead meat, if I'm armed and nearby.

Edited for spelling.

[PATH]

Mossad agents acting on their own in this country must be treated as enemy agents. As far as I know we don't go about assassinating people in Israel. I am a supporter of Israel but this cannot happen. If this does happen and word gets out then Israel will compromise its friendship with the USA.

The benefits don't outweigh the problems that can arise frfom this!
A very bad idea!:uhoh:

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Searching the UPI wire turns up no such story.

http://www.upi.com

- pdmoderator

[geekWithA.45]

in the white box.

Sorry, I can't believe it either, but it's RIGHT THERE.


Either that, or

A) I'm insane. (I'm fairly certain I'm not)
B) The victim of some skulduggery....but I don't thinkso..I found it on Drudge too.

[TheeBadOne]

A military sniper does not take prisoners.

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

OK, now I see it. It's not indexed in the search engine yet.

Yipes.

- pdmoderator

[DeltaElite]

It sounds as though you people didn't know that the Israelis have been doing this around the world for decades.
Nothing new, just being talked about openly nowadays.

If the US had practiced this type of varmint control, 9/11 may not have happened. Just food for thought.

FWIW, I am for the assassination of non US citizen enemies.
Pre-emptive strikes can be very effective.

Flame away........ :neener:

[rock jock]

I agree with DE, as long as they are non-US citizens.

[Gordon]

Welcome to the real world. Nations have been doing this for ever. The US cut way back on it after Watergate fiasco dragged our dirty laundry out and we signed the Pres. ban on hits to silence the bleeding hearts. How is the Mossad's .22 in the head much different than our Hellfire missle from drone in somebody elses country? You (anglo saxon 4 letter word) with the bull and you get the horn. Yeah like the "legal system" is gonna work or has ever worked to stop terrorists, hell it cant even put away double murderers caught red handed. Dont worry youll never have to fear the Mossad doing anything in US you wouldnt do too.

[G-Raptor]

Gordon's got it right. Assasination has been government policy ever since government was invented. Why wipe out a city or two when you can pop one guy and accomplish your objective? Whether they talk about it or not, they're still gonna do it.

[4v50 Gary]

Yeah, but it ruins our murder statistics and the antis scream for more gun control.

Knew of one cadaver that caused a tri-agency dispute. The agency that found the cadaver said not our jurisdiction. City agency said it's CHP's job. CHP said it was the City's. Back & forth and the sergeants (and then Lts) from each agency were busy fingerpointing. Why? No one wants the crime stats on their agency, the lengthy investigation and expenses. :p Me? I'd call it a suicide and close the case. :o

[NewShooter78]

Well, I'll have to agree. I'm quite certain our own gov't has done this sort of thing before and is probably still doing it. It's kind of like in the movie Swordfish, not that I totally agree with John Travolta's character's methods. But why shouldn't we and our allies hit back at terrorism with its own game. All these counties are acting as if we are trying to colonize the world, but damnit, I want to feel safe in my own country! If S.H. wants WMD, why don't we just park a few subs of the coast in the gulf and let them keep watch. N. Korea wants to build nukes, we should put some silos in S. Korea. If its a non citizen Mossad wants to whack, I'm not really all that worried about it. Now I'm not saying that Israel should have a blank check to do what ever it is they want to do, but since they have been doing this for decades and still want to piss off all of their neighbors, they might as well play the same way that Palestine does.

[Waitone]

In case it hasn't dawned on anyone, but the streets of America is the battlefield.

I think the article merely puts in print what is ongoing.

The military can not find snipers in the numbers they deem necessary.

A very wise man, quite experienced in the world of "conflicts other than war" and intelligence said our current war will turn on human intelligence and snipers.

Ugly.

[Art Eatman]

The Arabs, being rather slow learners, tried twice to invade Israel and kill all the Jews. ("How do you know it's an Egyptian tank? Easy. One speed forward, three in reverse.") It finally occured to the twits that head-to-head didn't work.

So, the various Arab states sponsor terrorism. Bigger mistake; now the Israelis are really getting POed. Maybe if a few terrs and maybe some moneymen are killed, minds might be changed from action to contemplation.

The world owuld be a lot better off if these mullahs would all go to work for the Office of Navel Contemplation.

Art

[P12]

I read or heard somewhere a sniper school instructor make a comment to the order of;

"It may be hard for some to swallow but, there are people in this world that just need to be shot!"

So true! So true!

(edited to add)

I wonder if they are taking applications?

[Art Eatman]

Sniper? He'd have had to have been speaking before the 1920s.

There was a bunch of crime going on in the east Texas oilfields. Robberies, muggings, murders...The Texas Dept of Public Safety sent Ranger Captain Frank Hamer up to investigate. He telegraphed a report back:

"There's nothing wrong up here that a little salubrious killing won't fix, and I'm just the man to give it to them."

"There's some folks just need to be shot." has been heard in the halls of Texas law enforcement since somewhere back in the 19th century.

:), Art

[ahenry]

"There's some folks just need to be shot." has been heard in the halls of Texas law enforcement since somewhere back in the 19th century.


:D

[Gray Peterson]

This scares the utter hell out of me. Hit squads like Mossad have made mistakes before. If a Mossad hit squad were to make a mistake, kill an entire family, and then get caught, what then?

[Bostonterrier97]

The Moussad has a very long Arm. After Israeli Athletes were murdered during the 1972 Olympics, the Moussad went after the Palestinian masterminds involved. They were whacking people all over Europe.

[Porter Rockwell]

It appears we the unwashed masses have no say in this invasion of religous fanatics whether they are Israeli or Muslim.
An enlightning read by a defected Israeli Colonel titled By Way Of Deception sheds some light on the other sides spooks service.
It's really difficult to understand the primitive concept of my religion is better than yours to justify a world war complete with nukes.

[faustulus]

I don't think we would actually help them do this but there really isn't anything we can do to effectively stop them. That is the double edged sword of freedom, the more free you are the more free those who wish to harm you are. Personally I will take freedom over any threat to life and limb, after all I have a gun too.

[dave]

Stop them?

Hell, if they stop by the house, I'll give them a cup of coffee.

Boys and girls, we're either in this to WIN, or we're in it to LOSE. Everyone needs to unbunch their panties and get on with things.

You DO NOT have a war without people being killed. Where they are killed is of no matter. Who is killed, matters greatly. As long as the bad guys are the ones dieing, I don't think it much matters who's doing the killing. Or where.

Just one of those "my opinion" things, you know?

[Hkmp5sd]

When the Mossad went after the Black Septembrists, they tried their best to not injure or kill anyone other than the target. They took precautions that actually increased the danger to themselves to ensure only the tango got wacked. For the most part, they were successful.

This scares the utter hell out of me. Hit squads like Mossad have made mistakes before. If a Mossad hit squad were to make a mistake, kill an entire family, and then get caught, what then?

In that case, they are tried for murder and sent to prison just like anyone else killing innocent people.

If they do it right, you will never hear about it.

[Derek Zeanah]

When the Mossad went after the Black Septembrists, they tried their best to not injure or kill anyone other than the target. They took precautions that actually increased the danger to themselves to ensure only the tango got wacked. For the most part, they were successful.Yeah, but didn't they recently justify an F16 dropping a 1000 lb bomb on an apartment complex, and the resulting 20-some civilian casualties (including women and children), as "acceptable" because they successfully took out a "legitimate target?"

If they didn't throw in their version of Delta to deal with that issue and decided to do it with high-explosive instead, I think one could question whether modern-day Israel has the same attitude toward protection of innocents that they did in the 70's.

[Chris Rhines]

When the Mossad went after the Black Septembrists, they tried their best to not injure or kill anyone other than the target. Except for, you know, the occasional Moroccan waiter. :rolleyes:

- Chris

[Hkmp5sd]

and the resulting 20-some civilian casualties (including women and children), as "acceptable" because they successfully took out a "legitimate target?"

Unlike Timothy McVeigh, I don't believe in allowing collateral damage. :)

However, if we are going to claim the US will track down and capture and/or kill terrorists where we find them, then we can't really complain that some other country is doing the same here, unless they screw up and kill the wrong person or innocents along with the correct person.

[Joe Demko]

Why can't they just handle it the way the CIA used to do? Just contract the needed killings out to the mob. Maintains plausible deniability, no need to actually have Mossad agents on US soil, corpse disposal also taken care of by experts. All very cost effective and tidy.

[Chris Rhines]

1.) Plausable deniability really isn't worth that much these days. It's more of a psychological comfort than anything else.

2.) The Mossad hiring people to commit assassanations on US soil isn't really any better than Mossad officers doing it themselves, not in a moral sense.

3.) The mob? The same people who fall all over themselves ratting out their employers, business partners, and family members when the ADA comes sniffing around? I'd rather hire my hatchetmen from LA street gangs.

- Chris

[mjustice]

In concept, I don't see a problem with it.

But they'd damn well better have a *PERFECT* record here in the US (from intel on the Tango to the job itself). If the pull one of those Jordanian jobs and get caught, or screw it up and kill the wrong person, US-Israel relations could be flushed down the toilet real quick.

MJ

[Art Eatman]

The serious question for those with any pretensions to morals and ethics is that of how you deal with Truly Bad Folks who surround themselves with non-combatants. In essence, a hostage situation with an no real limits as to numbers and space.

A military approach means collateral damage. This means extreme disapproval on the world stage; it can mean economic retribution which is then hard on your own population.

Assassination is thus a reasonable and logical alternative. There are specific targets, and any by-error collateral damage is minimized.

Art

[Joe Demko]

Apparently, I am going to have to break down and start using those abominable emoticons. I've been shovelling out some really first class deadpan humor of late and it is consistently going unrecognized.

[Art Eatman]

Aw, Golgo, you're just too, too sub-tull. :D Maybe dead-pan doesn't penetrate dead-brain.

(Did I say that? Oops!)

:D, Art

[cordex]

It's really difficult to understand the primitive concept of my religion is better than yours to justify a world war complete with nukes.
I agree.
What's the bearing on the topic at hand, though?
:scrutiny:
I must have missed the part in the story where it said that the Mossad agents were going to be exterminating all non-Jews with nuclear weapons in WWIII.

[2nd Amendment]

I surrendered to worshiping the Great Emoticon long ago. It's just one of those compromises of the Net. :D :banghead: And like I said elsewhere, if ya didn't lay it on with a trowel... :neener:

[Chris Rhines]

Jeez, I'm usually better with sarcastic humor. Must be too early in the day...

- Chris

[Khornet]

why the hell did they ANNONUCE it?

[NeverAgain26]

Right...:rolleyes:

Israel is going to telegraph it's moves on assasinating people in the U.S. of A. and U.S. officials are confirming it. Come on...

Never is going to happen (and when it does, we'll never know about it).

NA26

[moa]

Well, if the report is true, what is to stop the Mossad from whacking Americans that they find politically or otherwise distasteful?

Suppose they decide to take out that ol' Palestinian shmoozer, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Then I wonder if the usual suspects will be the "vast right wing conspiracy", the NRA, gun-nuts, abortion foes, Jiffy Lub, etc.

[NeverAgain26]

Quick question:

If the shoe were on the other foot and a secret U.S. agency (not CIA/FBI but something really effective) were reported to be taking out terrorists in assasinations on Israeli soil, how many of us would object to that? Not many, IMHO.

NA26

[Chris Rhines]

Well, other than the fact that the CIA has assassanated FNs in their home country (Yemen) recently...

But I object to that, too.

- Chris

[NeverAgain26]

Chris, fair enough. But what's your solution to rooting out snakes wherever they may be - especially if those snakes are coming after you and yours in your backyard? Would you take them out in your neighbor's backyard (providing your neighbor was agreeable)?

NA26

[Rangerover]

I am going to have to break down and start using those abominable emoticons.
I dunno. It's exceedingly difficult to impart a conversational tone to internet messages. I usually wind up feeling like I've insulted somebody no matter how many times I edit a response. You just can't convey things like tone of voice, which are so important to everyday communication. Hence, ye friendly neighborhood smiley! "Emoticon" is so cold and impersonal...the little bug-eyed dude is my favorite, :what: , but I must confess to an almost paternal favoritism for this little guy as well: :neener:

[Chris Rhines]

Snakes? I like snakes. :D

Seriously though, I am opposed to assassination as a tool of national policy, period. Foreign or domestic makes no difference. I don't have any particular interest in 'rooting out [terrorists] wherever they may be' either. Oh, don't get me wrong, if the opportunity comes up I'm fully in favor of arresting, trying, and punishing terrorists like the common criminals they are. But the War on Some Terrorism is way down on my list of important things to worry about.

Probably not the answer you were looking for. Sorry.

- Chris

[NeverAgain26]

War on Some Terrorism? That's interesting. Please elaborate. Thanks.

As for the rest, if they can be caught, it's one thing. But if not, just let them get away?

And if they are caught and the evidence is not enough to convict them in a court of law to put them away for ever, and you know they are going to strike and strike hard down the road, would you let them free?

I like fair rules when everyone plays by them. These guys have no rules, Chris.

NA26

[Chris Rhines]

'War on Some Terrorism' - my bitter play on the term 'War on Some Drugs.' Just as the federales persecute people for owning weed but turn a blind eye to the far more destructive drug Ethyl Alcohol (for example), the USG wages 'war' against terrorists that it dislikes while ignoring or actively supporting the ones that are on it's A-list (or are full-time employees.)

As for the rest, if they can be caught, it's one thing. But if not, just let them get away?Um, yeah, that is generally what you do when you cannot catch a criminal...

And if they are caught and the evidence is not enough to convict them in a court of law to put them away for ever, and you know they are going to strike and strike hard down the road, would you let them free? Okay, this is a bit more clear.

First, if you !know! that the terrorist-suspect-in-question is going to strike again at some point, then it logically follows that you have evidence sufficent to make a conspiracy beef stick. If not, then you really don't !know! anything, you only suspect.

In which case yeah, you let them go. That's the only ethical thing to do.

These guys have no rules, Chris. I do. That's the difference between them and me.

- Chris

[Art Eatman]

Chris, I think this is the fundamental point of disagreement: "First, if you !know! that the terrorist-suspect-in-question is going to strike again at some point, then it logically follows that you have evidence sufficent to make a conspiracy beef stick."

And if he's solo? Alternatively, how of necessity would you have "evidence" How about if a terr's history is one of steady announcements he will kill? Or, kill again?

Say the guy was wandering down your street and tossed a grenade into a cafe. It didn't go off. So, he gets 7 to 10 and does five and gets out. Whaddaya do, hope he had an epiphany?

Lord knows, I don't need lectures about ethics and morals and rules. But when folks make a career--short though it might be--of offering to kill me and mine, well, "There's just some folks need killin'." Sort of a "Do unto others before they do it to you." thing, with the onus having to do with the knowledge of intent.

I dunno. In my more cynical moments, looking at just the idea of 5-or-whatever billion people in the world, I figure the only mammalian surplus is good ol' homo sap, and losing a select few here and there ain't gonna hurt nuthin'. As long as me and mine do the selecting, natch.

:), Art

[Chris Rhines]

This was going to be longer, but I looked at it and said to myself, "Is anyone going to wade through this whole thing?"

...and losing a select few here and there ain't gonna hurt nuthin'. As long as me and mine do the selecting, natch. Here's the problem. You and yours won't be the ones doing the selecting. Once you advocate the initation of force on such shaky grounds, you lose the moral right to object when someone does the same to you. If you advocate the assassination of terrorist suspects, sans due process, how can you argue when the feds classify gun owners as terrorists and turn the hit squads lose on you and yours?

- Chris

[M1911]

Well, if the report is true, what is to stop the Mossad from whacking Americans that they find politically or otherwise distasteful?Oh, I don't know. Maybe the fact that we give them a billion or two a year in assistance and we'd be mighty pissed...

Get real.

[faustulus]

1.) Plausable deniability really isn't worth that much these days. It's more of a psychological comfort than anything else.

I disagree, it is and has been very important in the political realm.

Another thing is that arguing morality is difficult because there is no yard stick, all morality is subjective and therefore useless in a political sense, what we have is rule of law. It isn't perfect and I may not agree with it but it is the system we have chosen. In a round about way what I am saying is there is no moral "high ground" only moral "other ground."
We do not afford our laws protections to people in other countries. Just as they do not afford their laws protection to us in ours. Therefore, the rules we make to govern that interaction are disticnt from rules that govern our inhabitants.

[Art Eatman]

Ah, mea culpa, Chris!

Chris said, "...how can you argue when the feds classify gun owners as terrorists and turn the hit squads lose (sic) on you and yours?"

I thought they already had. Okay. More seriously, I'm really in doubt that 90 million of us would be so classified. That's getting toward tinfoil-hat paranoia. It plays well with the Left-zinger mediahcrities, of course, but that's about it.

Art

Mediahcrity: Just your average, run-of-the-mill incompetent Mediahhh person.