yeah, she really should have kept her mouth shut. there is nothing wrong with saving lives by using “israeli methods” of interragation, nor is there a problem with mossad-niks working in iraq, where they could both gather interlligence important for israel, and share their expertise with american colleagues. naturally however, there will be a s***storm among the arabs, the french and the far-lefties.

what about the quotes from the israeli foreign ministry denying it all?

Blame the Jews, the Jews did it. STeal cable, the Jews made me. rob a store, the Jews made me. right.
Newsmax is ultra right,
and AP and al-reuters are? nothing?
how about the abu Ghraib was borrowed from ARAB PRISON SYSTEMS. oh wait, the prisoners weren’t executed on the spot. or beheaded.

Please stop using the condescending “might irritate many in the Arab world”.
Why is national and foreign policy supposed to consider the Arab world, masses, street, rage, leaders, etc…?
Are the Arabs really mindless primitive fanatics that can be incited by simple ‘insults’ to anything Arab related?
First, please give them more credit.
Then, when do we demand that the Arabs be careful to not incite the ‘West’?

Well that’s nice Teri
if you can’t say anything interesting, you can always rant about imagined anti-semitism and attack Robert Fisk personally even though I never cited him
Here’s a clue : Israelis are not “THE JEWS”, they are Israelis.

When in trouble, don’t admit your own mistakes blame the Jews. Human nature hasn’t changed that much. Jews are still a convenient excuse.

SNAFU: “The other odd thing is Newsmax’s interest and reporting. They don’t print anything without some overlying political agenda. So, why would the usually very pro-Isreal rag print such stories which might comprimise Isreali roles at Abu Ghraib?”
I understand that NewsMax is connected somehow to Sun Myung Moon’s Washington Times. In any event, it makes a certain amount of sense that a medium (or media) with a stake in an ideological conservative agenda would find it fairly easy to scapegoat any group convenient enough to take the heat off the Bush-Cheney administration.
Just as Andrew Sullivan finally learned that Log Cabin Republicans are expendable for the sake of the conservative agenda, it would also be wise for Jews and our leadership (such as it is) to learn that there are few enough of us to be likewise politically expendable. It is perhaps relevant to recall at this point the words of James Baker III who once told then-President George H. W. Bush (according to former NYC mayor Ed Koch), “Fuck the Jews. They don’t vote for us anyway.”

Zionista. Newsmax is associated with Richard Mellon Scaife, primarily. The connection to Moon and the Wash Times is, to my knowledge, purely ideological and social in nature. But, not financial.
I”ve always been of the school of thought that the right-wing of the US is using Israel and the pro-Isreal vote, and once another secure base of “democracy” was established in the ME, (Iraq) they’d dump “the Jews”, as fast as they could.
Something to think about.

“please point out where I “fall back into classic anti-Semitic stereotyping”
Babylonian, I never said that you, Babylonian fell into classic anti-Semitic stereotyping. I was saying the Robert Fisk did.
The are numerous examples of Robert Fisk using anti-Semitic stereotypes, but it will take time to pull them together. As for Newsmax, right wingers have been turning on Israel and American Jews. They needed someone to blame when they invading Iraw didn’t go the way they planned.

s that the explanation you would use for AP, Janice Karpinski, Newsweek and Reuters as well ?
I’m lost. What are you explaining away and not explaining away: that Israelis were somehow involved with the U.S.-U.K. side in Iraq? That Israelis were somehow involved with prisoner interrogations at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq?
That someone Newsmax describes as a Christian Iraqi named John Israel was somehow involved with prisoner interrogations? That Newsmax is right about John Israel but wrong about his nationality? That the similarity between the name “John Israel” and the country name “Israel” points to involvement on the part of the State of Israel in Abu Ghraib interrogations? That the bizarre string of evidence that SNAFU concocts involving a tattoo, assumptions as to “Moroccan Jews” and “frum”-ness, and what s-he figures are Hebrew letters somehow connect the State of Israel to something that someone did at Abu Ghraib Prison?
Don’t get me wrong: conspiracy theories are great fun. I’m just not sure what the conspiracy theory here is.

There’s really no “conspiracy theory”.. US Generals and other officials have said Israelis were involved in the incidents at Abu Ghraib. Period.
If there’s any “conspiracy theory” it’s that certain people think there’s a grand anti-semitic conspiracy to blame Israel and that anyone who says they spoke to the Israelis or knew of them are really just anti-semites looking to “blame everything on the jews”
Ariel Beery wrote:
“As I wrote on my own website, doesn’t it seem a bit odd that the person supposedly responsible for the base didn’t even know who was working under her?”
Yes, and no. Yes one would think she would know, but maybe the CIA stuff was on a need-to-know basis
Ariel continued…
“And then she blames it, out of all peoples, on Israel? “
I don’t think she’s “blaming it” on Israel. Whether Israelis were there or not doesn’t really change the fact that she was in charge and is probably guilty.

quick. which country is the only nation with a supreme court ruling banning torture?

Were there Israelis at Abu Ghraib? Of course there were. Israel would have shown up with or without an invitation from America. This is a prison filled with every “villain” the US could get their hands on. The fact that some are innocent doesn’t lessen the value for Israel in seeing who’s there and what they know. Israel could very well have offered to help with the interrogation to get their people inside. Just because Israelis were there, doesn’t mean they were the ones doing the torturing.
There are, I’m sure, Israelis all over Iraq. A huge, chaotic space, one state away would be cause for concern to any country. Now Jordan has said that Iraq’s borders need to be more secure. And if people are crossing the border to Jordan, where do you think the might be heading? If Seymour Hersch is to be believed, Israel already has more influence in Iraqi Kurdistan than any other sovereign state.

8upus, YOU made all those connections. No one else did. The “Conspiracy theory” is in YOUR head, not in any of the statements written above. You construct a very bad logical fallacy. But, I do agree with you on one point. You are indeed lost. Very very lost. Er, thanks — but I made no connections. Just quoting you, really; the Moroccan-Jew/Hebrew-lettering/frum/tattoo/Scorpion thing is classic.
But, by all means, tell us what you meant. At one point you explain that We know that at least “translators” of Isreali nationality were there Where did you learn that Israelis worked as translators in Abu Ghraib? Is it a secret source or can others read it, too?
In a similar vein, Babylonian writes that there’s really no “conspiracy theory”.. US Generals and other officials have said Israelis were involved in the incidents at Abu Ghraib. Period. I was alluding to your accusing Susan Stein of trying to “explain away” various news sources — AP and Newsweek, apparently. What is that AP and Newsweek were reporting, but that Susan Stein was trying to explain away?
And, just so those of us playing along at home can follow along, where can we read about these US Generals and other officials? Is this (Karpinski) the big story, or was there something else?

Sigh. SNAFU wrote that we know that at least “translators” of Isreali nationality were there, referring to Abu Ghraib — the only coherent portion of an otherwise bizarre posting. A couple of responses and many histrionics later, still no source, save learn to read between the lines. The point, dear SNAFU, is to distinguish between the things we invent and the things which we know.
Now, that the Israeli services have been involved with Iraq at some level is stunningly obvious; noone here has disputed it, though it’s always fun when folks put words in our mouths or invent straw men against whom to tilt yet more and more mightily. (in the latest episode: you’d like to think that Isreali’s aren’t in Iraq, or aren’t involved in actions such as occurred at Abu Ghraib, but you would be wrong.. Who is this you? Where do we meet her-him?)
You’d like to think that Isreali’s aren’t in Iraq, or aren’t involved in actions such as occurred at Abu Ghraib, but you would be wrong. Why SNAFU who art enamoured of “logical fallacy” as your namecalling weapon of choice, I am truly surprised! A suggestion: tone down the rhetoric, lose the obfuscation, stick the parts you know are true, and you’ll get to real conversations much more quickly. Now, you were talking about a particular Iraqi prison and a bunch of translators, yes?

8upus, you can’t have it both ways. You are attempting to play it as if you are the “victim”. But, your smugness is met with equal smugness, as you deserve. Simple as that. If you write decently, you shall be replied to decently.
You wrote:But, by all means, tell us what you meant. At one point you explain that We know that at least “translators” of Isreali nationality were there Where did you learn that Israelis worked as translators in Abu Ghraib? Is it a secret source or can others read it, too?
Nice. So you got a nice smug reply: Here’s my advice. Get a subscription to both Stratfor and Janes. Check out Debka on a regular basis.(Like I do.) Go back and read the past three years of articles on intelligence activivites in Iraq prior to and after the US invasion on all of those sites.
That was simply my response to someone who is obviously less intersted in knowing the truth than they are arguing for the sake of arguing, or defending those things they wish to defend, regardless of the FACTS. Perhaps I should have cut and paste smug reply to smug answer. My bad.
Here’s another from 8upus: That someone Newsmax describes as a Christian Iraqi named John Israel was somehow involved with prisoner interrogations? That Newsmax is right about John Israel but wrong about his nationality? That the similarity between the name “John Israel” and the country name “Israel” points to involvement on the part of the State of Israel in Abu Ghraib interrogations? That the bizarre string of evidence that SNAFU concocts involving a tattoo, assumptions as to “Moroccan Jews” and “frum”-ness, and what s-he figures are Hebrew letters somehow connect the State of Israel to something that someone did at Abu Ghraib Prison?
Don’t get me wrong: conspiracy theories are great fun. I’m just not sure what the conspiracy theory here is.
See, when someone invokes the words “conspiracy theory”, it’s a nice catch-all code phrase for “this person is nuts”. It’s also a nice way of not dealing with the actual issues at hand, which you did, quite badly I might add. So, I chalk you up as a spinner, a smoke and mirrors dude. Am I wrong? Well, from your reply, I’d say not at all. The questions I raise are the same questions being asked by most of the worlds top journo’s and in blogs all over the world. But, you want to focus on a single semminly obvious point.
Did you even read what I wrote? My point was, that some of it appears to be psyops. But, apparently, you are looking for something else.(To prove I’m wrong?) If you’d actually read what I wrote above, you’d see I wasn’t “concocting” any kind of “evidence” at all, against Israel or anyone. I was simply speculating. I even asked for assistance. But, you were too busy seeing that any answers just MIGHT implicate Isreal. Right? See, personally, I don’t give a shit. I’m an equal opportunity shit detector. If the Isreali’s are involved in torture in Iraq, I’d not be surprised at all. Actually, I’d be surprised if they WEREN’T.
Here it is once again, read it this time:
My guess is, yes, of course there were Isreali agents taking part in the torture at Abu Ghraib. That much has been established, at least in theory.(Read taht AGAIN 8upus. THEORY.) We know that at least “”translators” of Isreali nationality were there, so it’s reasonable to assume others were as well. That is to be expected.
Now, the problem is, of course, that torture tactics are currently quite illegal in Israel. Not to mention the firestorm that Isreali complicity at Abu Ghraib would start in the Arab world. The Isreali’s are attempting to cover up their tracks, or are simply trying to cover up their presence in Iraq. (It’s entirely possible that the Isreali’s were simply observing, ir simple translators, and it is also possible they were much more involved, it’s possible they were “consulting”.)
The other odd thing is Newsmax’s interest and reporting. They don’t print anything without some overlying political agenda. So, why would the usually very pro-Isreal rag print such stories which might comprimise Isreali roles at Abu Ghraib? To intentionally incite Arab anger and violence?
This makes me think the entire thing is some type of psyops. This picture is most likely psyops, and it was beleived by many to be a pic of an “Isreali” soldier at Abu Ghraib. The thing is, it was posted on May 9, 2004 on Yahoo! Italy with the following caption: “A prisoner, who said he was a Moroccan Jew, shows off his tattoos at the Abu Ghraib Prison on the outskirts of Baghdad, Iraq, late Saturday, May 8, 2004. Military police said that he was being housed in a private cell, instead of one of the large tent compounds outside, to protect him from other prisoners, because of his religion. ” The pictures from Abu Ghraib broke the last week of April. The pics slowly came out in batches. Odd to say the least.
Personally, I don’t think it’s a “Moroccan Jew” in the pic, for a simple reason: Tattoo’s aren’t frum. And, it’s hard for me to believe that any Jew who is gung-ho enough for Isreal is going to defile the body in that way.
It’s either a real tatoo or it’s a fake tattoo. It’s difficult to believe that an Isreali soldier would get a permenent tattoo. My guess is that it is indeed a photo from Abu Ghraib as originally thought, except, it’s not a real tattoo. It’s meant to intimidate.
Anyone care to interpret the wording? (Not even sure if it’s Hebrew. It looks deriviative. Probably only meant to appear vaguely Hebrew-like.) Maybe the scorpion is meant to refer to Cheshvan?
“The Scorpion” is also a torture tactic btw. It’s also the nickname for a very famous prison in Egypt. So, it’s a powerful image to say the least…
Just asking questions. Speculation. See, as even you have to agree, Israeli’s are in Iraq. But, see, what I don’t have a problem admitting is that those Israeli’s are probably involved in the “darker arts” as it is said.
Why? Because it’s what they do! As I said before, if they weren’t… I’d really be shocked.
But, since you seem to want some kind of PROOF that Israeli’s were at Abu Ghraid, what kind of proof do you want?
Since you seem to think that the esteemed investigative news hounds at Newsmax are worth beleiving when it suits your mood… here.
Too biased? Hmmm. How about Reuters?
Or something from Sy Hersh: According to American and Israeli military and intelligence officials, Israeli commandos and intelligence units have been working closely with their American counterparts at the Special Forces training base at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and in Israel to help them prepare for operations in Iraq. Israeli commandos are expected to serve as ad-hoc advisers—again, in secret—when full-field operations begin.

From the LA Times: In the last six months, U.S. Army commanders, Pentagon officials and military trainers have sought advice from Israeli intelligence and security officials on everything from how to set up roadblocks to the best way to bomb suspected guerrilla hide-outs in an urban area…

How about Time: If it is to destroy the Iraqi insurgency, the U.S. will have much to learn from the Israelis in the dark arts of intelligence-gathering in an occupied population. Israeli intelligence maintains a substantial cadre of highly experienced Arabic-speaking operatives, priding itself on its capability to gather human intelligence as far away as Iran.
Oh, there’s more… how about The Guradian:The Israeli Defence Force (IDF) has sent urban warfare specialists to Fort Bragg in North Carolina, the home of US special forces, and according to two sources, Israeli military “consultants” have also visited Iraq.
You see, 8upus, that’s reality. Proof? It’ll never be on the front page of the NY Times. If you think it will be, good luck to ya. Truly.
Also of note, in that Time artiicle, the following: As one Iraqi waiting on line at a checkpoint last week told the New York Times, “I see no difference between us and the Palestinians.” That’s a worrying development for U.S. authorities, since in the eyes of much of the Arab world, the humiliation of occupation has served to justify terrorism against the Israelis.
It’s not just the Iraqis of the Sunni Triangle that are seeing some connection between their experience and that of the Palestinians. A series of recent media reports suggests that U.S. forces have specifically sought advice, training and expertise from the Israeli Defense Force on how to deal with the Iraqi insurgency, although such contacts have remained discreet — “PR catastrophe” would be an understatement for the reaction in the Arab world, and in Iraq itself, if an army that likes to think of itself as Iraq’s liberators turns out to be seeking coaching from Israel.

Indeed. That article is dated Dec. 09, 2003.

Israeli interrogators in Iraq – An exclusive report

Jane’s Digest
At least one aspect of the occupation of Iraq was well planned by Washington. The USA needed help conducting mass interrogations of Arabic-speaking detainees. Foreign Report can now reveal that, to make up for this shortfall, the USA employed Israeli security service (Shin Bet) experts to help their US counterparts ‘break’ their captives.
The USA could have approached other friendly regimes in the Middle East, such as Egypt or Jordan, which have vast experience interrogating Muslim fundamentalists. The Israelis may be brilliant linguists, but they cannot match Arabs speaking their own language. But there is a significant difference between the Egyptian and Jordanian interrogation techniques and those of the Israelis. For the Egyptian and Jordanian secret services, physical torture is an essential part of interrogation and a key element in breaking the prisoner’s will and making them co-operative.
In the past, Shin Bet would use torture when it interrogated prisoners. But 20 years ago, an Israeli government committee investigated the security service’s practices and the use of torture was subsequently banned, forcing Shin Bet to adopt a variety of techniques that did not cause physical damage. These new methods are much more palatable to US sensibilities. They also brought faster and more convincing results.
Foreign Report has learnt that top Shin Bet interrogation experts were sent to Iraq to help with the most difficult interrogations, such as the captured heads of the Iraqi intelligence – and perhaps with former president Saddam Hussein. US sources say that in spite of the incidences of abuse in Abu Ghraib prison, such events are not representative of the sophisticated methods that Shin Bet used in Iraq.
Most of the Shin Bet interrogators are of Ashkenazim (European) origin who study the Arabic language only when they are in their twenties after joining the security service. Before each interrogation a psychologist who has studied in depth the mental profile of the prisoner is consulted. The interrogator will also read intelligence reports about their charge.
328 of 779 words
[End of non-subscriber extract.]

http://www.janes.com

Babylonian… be careful using Janes or Stratfor extracts… I got a nicely worded but very cranky letter for doing that in an online forum. They don’t like it at all… (I have a subscription, and copied the entire thing… my bad…. Word from the wise…) Just sayin’… teehee.
And, the subscription is worth the money. Thanks for the extract…
If you get the subsript, there’s a great article on Hussein’s last few months. Not what you would think.
8upus…. you are simply not informed. Sorry for you.
As I said, it is generally considered a fact that Isreal “consultants”, “interogators” and “interpretors” have been in Iraq. I was not willing to cut and paste from either Stratfor or Janes. (The non-subsriber extracts hadn’t occurred to me, thanks Babylonian.) It’s simply not done, not even by professional journals. There is a system for doing so, and all info must be approved.
8upus:Just for fun, I thought it might be interesting to see where that fact came from. So far: nowhere.
No. Wrong. You are. Simply. Wrong. Like I said earlier. Get a subscription to an intel source. There are several. Stratfor is excellent. Janes is as well. Read Foreign Affairs. Read Debka. I’m sorry if such information is either out of your reach or just information which you don’t wish to know exists. Either way… You. Are. Wrong.
I’m simply not in the habit of spoon feeding. My bad.
It is interesting though to watch you bang your head against the wall… Just because you SAY something is not a fact, doesn’t mean it isn’t. And, it’s not my friggin’ job to teach you things you should already know….
From your attitude, you obviously know it all, right?
I might have actually sent you an internal link to a few Stratfor articles or a Janes issue, if you hadn’t been such a jerk. Peace.

The point is made. You lose. (This was some type of competition to you right?)

8upus: Nah — you confused a translator’s last name with the name of a country, invented a we know that fact on which to build a story, and went from there.
No. Actually. I did not. You assumed that. Please indicate where I said that. You can not. You assumed it. Incorrectly. I linked to several articles which mention John Israel, but I never postulated what you say. Hmmm. Do you always make things up?
One of the articles does mention the possibility that Karpinski confused John Israel’s saying “I’m John Israel” with “I’m an Israeli” or something to that affect… Have you confused me with Karpinski?
(Hint: I’m the one without the breasts.)
Whether or not “John B. Isreal” and the several other “third party nationals”, most who apparently have more than one passport, are Isreali or EU citizens is still up for grabs, as is whether John Israel (and the others for that matter) were actually and specifically working for the Isreali’s or anyone else etc is also up for grabs. It may come out in the wash. But, rather doubtful. If they are indeed special ops, that’s what layers of sub contractors are for. That’s what fake passports, multiple citizenships are for… to confuse and hide. Or, it could all be innocent….
But, there are some things which are established.
It’s understood that Israeli’s were and are in Iraq. That’s been a given and something that was hotly debated in a number of other forums over a year ago. You yourself agree with that above. (Remember? You DO remember right? Here’s a memory pill: “Now, that the Israeli services have been involved with Iraq at some level is stunningly obvious; noone here has disputed it, though it’s always fun when folks put words in our mouths or invent straw men against whom to tilt yet more and more mightily. (in the latest episode: you’d like to think that Isreali’s aren’t in Iraq, or aren’t involved in actions such as occurred at Abu Ghraib, but you would be wrong.. Who is this you? Where do we meet her-him?)
Unbelievable. From the very beginning, you have been condescending and arrogant.
“Straw man”. Right. Um. No. And, you can SAY that I’m putting words in your mouth, but, darn, you words look and sound so very similar! And, here they are: (AGAIN, cause you obviously need help in remembering!) But, by all means, tell us what you meant. At one point you explain that We know that at least “translators” of Isreali nationality were there Where did you learn that Israelis worked as translators in Abu Ghraib? Is it a secret source or can others read it, too?
Gee 8upus, just what are are we supposed to surmise from your words here? Hmmm? That, I don’t know, I’ll take a stab at it! That you think that Israeli’s in Iraq is a bunch of phooey? Bingo! Give the man a cigar! You see, your own words betray you 8upus. You obviously have issues with the very real fact that Israeli’s are in Iraq, otherwise, why attack me, why go after me in your first sentance for for saying that Israeli’s may have been at Abu Ghraib?
Now forgive me if I’m readin it wrong, which is entirely possible since you seem to be more concerned with attacking and condescending than understanding other points of view.
See, the problem is, as I said above, you ASSUME.
8upus: I was talking about your line re knowing about Israeli translators. I was talking about it because you’d linked to a story about an Iraqi Christian translator named John Israel. That’s the closest we’ve gotten.
No. That’s the closest YOU’VE gotten. You seem to think that for some reason I confused John Israel’s name with his nationality, which I’ve never done in this comment section nor in my head. You assumed that. And, once again, you are WRONG. Gee, how boring is this getting? Very. If you stopped assuming what others are thinking, you might begin to have a conversation.
Here’s some more: (Are we having fun yet?)
After thousands of lines, when you could have posted one link? Odd, that.
Not at all, if you’d bothered to read above. I simply did not feel obligated to prove to you something that you would simply ignore. First, I’d already been condescended too, right out of the box, by your going for the “conspiracy theory” attack. Bravo. Solid troll move. Good way to get someone to share info. Second, I told you where you can get the info. Both Stratfor and Janes, and CDI are subscription services. I am allowed use by a shared subscription. But, these services have very strict rules about internet use. Quite literally, they frown upon it. Free use doesn’t apply. So, I do not include links to these sites on my blog nor in comments, because they won’t work anyway, and I don’t cut and paste articles because it’s a violation of subscription. (As I described above, I made that mistake once prior.)
So, “one link” isn’t going to happen for those sources.
Ask yourself: when have you ever seen a link to a full article in Janes or Stratfor or CDI or any of the other intel services? Almost never. Now and again, they will have a media press release, but not too often. That’s why.
And, given that you were attacking me, what would be the point? As you did with Babylonian, you’d simply dismiss it. Not discuss it.
But, you don’t wish to actually discuss the issues…
it’s all “conspiracy theory”, for you, it’s all attack:
Where did you learn that Israelis worked as translators in Abu Ghraib? Is it a secret source or can others read it, too? Nice. See how you work? (Oh, I forgot. You just want to “talk”.)
And more attack: (note the condescencion, how it’s so original it DRIPS from the walls)
And, just so those of us playing along at home can follow along, where can we read about these US Generals and other officials? Is this (Karpinski) the big story, or was there something else?
And yet even MORE attack: SNAFU wrote that we know that at least “translators” of Isreali nationality were there, referring to Abu Ghraib — the only coherent portion of an otherwise bizarre posting. A couple of responses and many histrionics later, still no source, save learn to read between the lines. The point, dear SNAFU, is to distinguish between the things we invent and the things which we know.
Ah yes. SO, what do YOU know 8upus? Except how to tear into someone right off the bat. Nice. And, of course, if someone hits back, which is only natural, you call them on it! AHAHAHAAAHAHA! Woohoo!
Please not above, how rather than discuss anything in my post, you, 8upus, simply attack ME, calling the post “bizarre”, calling it “histronics”. Attack the messenger, divert the message.
And, as I said, you got a curt “do a friggin’ Google” and a “read between the lines’ from me, because, to be blunt, you were a twat from the get go. Simple as that.
Not a single, common “I don’t understand what you are trying to say SNAFU” or “Can you clarify or send some links” or anything like that from you! That would be actually be engaging a discussion, wouldn’t it. Yes, it would.
Please, go back. See and read your words o’ wisdom 8upus. You are the very epitome of arrogant condescending pisser. Read it again. Not a single actual cogent discussed point do you refute with other information or links. Not one.
As I point out above, to you, it’s all ad hominem right off the bat, right out of the box. So, you got a bit of what you dish out, because that is the language you speak, right? Of course it is darling.
And, all in all, when cornered, you backtrack, and misrepresent. Example:
You said: I was talking about your line re knowing about Israeli translators. I was talking about it because you’d linked to a story about an Iraqi Christian translator named John Israel. That’s the closest we’ve gotten.
Once again. With feeling this time: You assumed too much. The John Isreal link which I linked to was in regard to the larger issues. You have latched onto it for some reason, as if, if there is no proof (currently at least) that John Israel was an Israeli, then that means that NO Israeli’s were at Abu Ghraib. And, that’s just incorrect logic. There were, by numerous accounts, a good number of other “third party nationals”, “consultants” etc at Abu Ghraib. (And, for the love of pete, the two most popular passports for spooks these days are Iraqi and EU. Come on.)
So, why you’ve grasped at John Israel’s nationality as the Rosetta Stone of proof that no Israeli’s were at Abu Ghraib, I can only speculate.
As I said in my initial post on this, a great deal strikes me as psyops and disinfo. Who knows. What I do know is that any Israeli in Iraq, Mossad, Shin Bet, whatever is not going to have any link, officially, passport or otherwise, to the Holy Land. None.
So, why you continue to harp on it is just flabbergastingly frustrating to me. You don’t seem to understand, or want to understand, a few basic assumptions. Nor do you show any interest in actually engaging beyond attacking. Go back, read what you have written. You attacked right out of the box.
And, then, this:
For me it has been interesting, though, to see what happens when you call someone stringing together long what-if-maybe-therefore-probablys on what they try and advance as fact.
Uh. Sure. What ever you say 8upus. So, you like to jerk people off? Is that what you are saying? First, No “what-if, maybe’s” etc, were “strung along”.
You are a rhetorical bullshit artist.
All of this started off as a basic speculative post. “Isn’t this interesting? What does it all mean? Did they catch a real Israeli or is this just disinfo, mistaken info? ”
And, from the very start, that got you miffed.
Remember this oldie but goodie? It’s your very first post in this thread 8upus. Oooo, you were so cute when you were a puppy.
8upus: I’m lost. What are you explaining away and not explaining away: that Israelis were somehow involved with the U.S.-U.K. side in Iraq? That Israelis were somehow involved with prisoner interrogations at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq?
That someone Newsmax describes as a Christian Iraqi named John Israel was somehow involved with prisoner interrogations? That Newsmax is right about John Israel but wrong about his nationality? That the similarity between the name “John Israel” and the country name “Israel” points to involvement on the part of the State of Israel in Abu Ghraib interrogations? That the bizarre string of evidence that SNAFU concocts involving a tattoo, assumptions as to “Moroccan Jews” and “frum”-ness, and what s-he figures are Hebrew letters somehow connect the State of Israel to something that someone did at Abu Ghraib Prison?
Don’t get me wrong: conspiracy theories are great fun. I’m just not sure what the conspiracy theory here is.
Ah yes. The real golden thesis of 8upus’ rhetorical manipulation. Start right off and attack everything as “conspiracy”, even if no such thing was ever said, nor inferred.
Look at that first sentance: What are you explaining away and not explaining away: that Israelis were somehow involved with the U.S.-U.K. side in Iraq? That Israelis were somehow involved with prisoner interrogations at Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq?
I’ll tell you what. You seem to so enamored of links. Post a link to some information, pick a decently credible one please, no blogs or such, that states that Israeli’s have NOT been in Iraq or weren’t involved in intel ops such as at Abu Ghraib. Do that for me. I’d love to read that. Cause, all we have to go on right now is your opinion. And, frankly, that’s not much.
I offered my opinion and was willing to share certain factual links which I was able to share. But, before I even got to do that, you were jumping on my ass like a freak, attacking me, and most DEFINITELY NOT discussing any of the topics at hand. How fallacious of you 8upus. (clap clap clap)
You only been correct in one thing you’ve said in this forum so far:
I’m lost,
You assumed wrongly, and you decided to attack based on that incorrect assumption.
Here is the great final (thank you!) example of 8upus’ grand ad hominem of eternal wisdom:
You’ve served up a mixed menu of things that are obvious and things that are, uh, speculation. Somewhere in there, you actually made a claim of fact. Just for fun, I thought it might be interesting to see where that fact came from. So far: nowhere.
Ah yes. Convulute the messege, attack the messenger then blame them for not answering the question when they are busy responding to the attack whcih you have launched.
Brilliant. Good work.
The reality is though, you’ve not offered ONE SINGLE FACT TO REFUTE ANYTHING I HAVE SAID OR LINKED TO REGARDING ISRAELI’S IN IRAQ.
Not one.
Zero.
And, that’s a fact. You must be so proud.
How very telling….
Funny how all you seem to want to discuss is me, and attack me, rather than all the info you’ve been given.
Funny that. I’d be flattered if I gave a shit.

SNAFU wrote: Gee 8upus, just what are are we supposed to surmise from your words here? Hmmm? That, I don’t know, I’ll take a stab at it! That you think that Israeli’s in Iraq is a bunch of phooey?
No: that I think that there is no source indicating that “translators” of Israeli nationality were working in Abu Ghraib, despite your assertion to the contrary. Why you chose to fixate on translators, I can only imagine — particularly since you keep pointing to news source that talk about interrogators, as opposed to translators.
You were given a source indicating that “translators” are beleived to be at Abu Ghraib. Read it again.
“Translators” or “Interogators”, is all code for Special ops anyway. Are you friggin’ kidding me?
The reason I mention John Israel is because he was the only “translator” you’ve ever mentioned.
Oh, riight. SO, umm… what about your statement that I’ve confused John Israel with being “Israeli”.
Funny how you don’t answer that little tibit of nonsense. Again, you ASSUME.
Similarly, if I were to assert that my brother were a secret spy in downtown St. Petersburg, it would be very hard to refute — even if, and you will find this hard to believe, there are indeed Canadian spies in Russia, even as we speak.
Ah yes. More diversion. Very good.
What it is you believe I assumed, we can only wonder.
That I confused John Israel with being Israeli. Do you even read it at all? You can go ahead and wonder, but it’s up there, for all to read.
Nice obfucation 8upus. More diversion, more smoke and mirrors. And, please note, you still have not spoken on the issues at hand ONCE. Not once. Zero.
Invoke allusive maneuvers all you want.
You are a bullshiter. Sorry for you.
Next.