Sy Hersch's latest article omits Israeli abduction of Hamas politicians

[Postman]

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060821fa_fact

Don't get me wrong, it's a good article but he doesn't give the backstory as to why Hamas would "go back into the terror business"...

"For almost a year before its victory in the Palestinian elections in January, Hamas had curtailed its terrorist activities. In the late May intercepted conversation, the consultant told me, the Hamas leadership said that “they got no benefit from it, and were losing standing among the Palestinian population.” The conclusion, he said, was “ ‘Let’s go back into the terror business and then try and wrestle concessions from the Israeli government.’

Why doesn't he mention the Israeli's arresting and imprisoning the Democratically elected government that the Palestinians voted into office?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/29/news/mideast.php
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14204638/

Also:

This paragraph is pretty scary...can you say "stovepipe" or "cherry-picking"?

(1)The Pentagon consultant told me that intelligence about Hezbollah and Iran is being mishandled by the White House the same way intelligence had been when, in 2002 and early 2003, the Administration was making the case that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. “The big complaint now in the intelligence community is that all of the important stuff is being sent directly to the top—at the insistence of the White House—and not being analyzed at all, or scarcely,” he said. “It’s an awful policy and violates all of the N.S.A.’s strictures, and if you complain about it you’re out,” he said. “Cheney had a strong hand in this.”

and from the "reality based" community a warning to the "Alice in Wonderland Brigades"...

(2)Nonetheless, some officers serving with the Joint Chiefs of Staff remain deeply concerned that the Administration will have a far more positive assessment of the air campaign than they should, the former senior intelligence official said. “There is no way that Rumsfeld and Cheney will draw the right conclusion about this,” he said. “When the smoke clears, they’ll say it was a success, and they’ll draw reinforcement for their plan to attack Iran.”

as well as this....

(3)A high-level American military planner told me, “We have a lot of vulnerability in the region, and we’ve talked about some of the effects of an Iranian or Hezbollah attack on the Saudi regime and on the oil infrastructure.” There is special concern inside the Pentagon, he added, about the oil-producing nations north of the Strait of Hormuz. “We have to anticipate the unintended consequences,” he told me. “Will we be able to absorb a barrel of oil at one hundred dollars? There is this almost comical thinking that you can do it all from the air, even when you’re up against an irregular enemy with a dug-in capability. You’re not going to be successful unless you have a ground presence, but the political leadership never considers the worst case. These guys only want to hear the best case.”

If there is any solace to take in all of this it is that Hezbollah put up such a fierce defense to the Israeli onslaught that it just may throw a monkey wrench into the Bush Administration's plans for starting a war with Iran.

Though I won't hold my breath. (see paragraph 2 above)

[Freedom_from_Chains]

1. You're right, this is scary stuff

However, it has become the way we do business.

[leveymg]

2. Re: #2. Lebanon Bombing - they'll say it was a sucess. Bush today:

"Hezbollah guerillas had suffered a sound defeat at the hands of Israel in their monthlong Mideast war."

Sy sure got that one right.