Uprooted Palestinians

Is the "fall" President Assad really inevitable?

2012-02-03T15:48:00.000+04:00

By Sami Klaib
Translation by Alex

After 11 months of clashes in Syria, the world is persuaded that the Syrian situation is more complex than expected Western leaders. The direct military intervention is not posssible, changing the regime by force is not executable, therefore a settlement in the Security Council is needed save all faces and tempt Russians to approve a resolution limited to stop violence and dialogue. But, also, such settlement seem very difficult at the peak of global conflicting interests.

Qatar succeeded in the delivery of the Syrian file to the Security Council. Veteran Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabr Al-Thani is aware that he playing "soled" in Syrian crisis, where success is dangerous and failure more dangerous. Sheikh Hamad draged all Arabs after him to the Security Council. The crisis is the internationalization. A few months ago all Arabs in their league asserted that there would be no internationalization.

Russia also succeeded in becoming the first focus of the Security Council. The West, the Arabs behind it are working hard to satisfy Russia for signing a joint draft resolution. Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev avenged the Western intervention in Russia. His hand is on the Syrian file, while his eye on the latest US statement expressed "disappointment" over the refusal of Russian authorities to nominate Gregory Yavlinsky for the presidential elections. Putin will remain firm in its position at least to pass elections on 4 March with the least possible losses.

Neither Russia, nor China would accept regime change in Syria by force. The Russian cover for the Syrian military operations is clear. The Syrian military solution was a red line over the past months. Moscow has repeatedly informed the Syrian to wait and maintain a good relation with the Arab league, but things changed the last few days.

What has happened?

Translation to be continued

سوريا تعيش أكثر أيامها خطورة... هل "سقوط " الرئيس الأسد حتمي فعلاً؟

سامي كليب

بعد 11 شهرا من المواجهات في سوريا، اقتنع العالم بأن الوضع السوري أكثر تعقيدا مما توقع القادة الغربيون الكبار. لا التدخل العسكري المباشر ممكن، ولا "إزالة" النظام بالقوة قابلة للتنفيذ، فلا بد اذاً من تسوية في مجلس الأمن تحفظ وجه الجميع وتغري الروس بالموافقة على قرار يقتصر على وقف العنف والحوار. لكن التسوية أيضا تبدو شديدة الصعوبة لأن تضارب المصالح عالميا في أوجه.

نجحت قطر في إيصال الملف الى مجلس الأمن. نال رئيس الوزراء حمد بن جاسم بن جبر آل ثاني الثناء من الاميركيين والبريطانيين والفرنسيين في جلسة المجلس قبل يومين. يدرك هذا الدبلوماسي المحنك انه يلعب "صولد" في الازمة السورية، النجاح خطير والفشل أخطر. جرجر الشيخ حمد كل العرب خلفه الى مجلس الامن. تم تدويل الازمة بامتياز. قبل أشهر قليلة كان كل العرب في جامعتهم يؤكدون ان لا تدويل. وصل بعض الثناء الى نبيل العربي الأمين العام للجامعة العربية الحائرة كما جل العالم في التعاطي مع سوريا وأزمتها.

ونجحت روسيا كذلك في أن تصبح محور الاهتمام الأول في مجلس الامن. بات الغرب وخلفه العرب يخطبون ودها لاستدرار توقيعها على مشروع قرار مشترك. انتقم فلاديمير بوتين ومن خلفه ديمتري ميدفيديف من التدخل الغربي في بلاده. يده على الملف السوري، وعينه على آخر تصريح للخارجية الاميركية أعربت فيه عن "خيبة أملها" حيال رفض السلطات الروسية ترشيح المعارض غريغوري يافلينسكي للانتخابات الرئاسية. سيبقى بوتين صلبا في موقفه على الاقل لتمرير الانتخابات في 4 آذار المقبل بأقل خسائر ممكنة.

لا روسيا ولا الصين ستقبلان بتغيير للنظام السوري بالقوة. الغطاء الروسي للعملية العسكرية السورية واضح. كان القرار الامني السوري بـ"الحسم العسكري" خطا أحمر طيلة الأشهر الماضية. أبلغت موسكو مرارا القيادة السورية بضرورة التروي والإبقاء على علاقة جيدة مع الجامعة العربية، لكن الأمر تغير في الأيام الماضية .... ماذا جرى؟

نجح النظام السوري في تحويل "فخ" المراقبين لمصلحته. كان يراد للمراقبين أن يشجعوا على التظاهر، فاكتشف المراقبون أن الوضع على الارض مغاير للكثير مما تبثه الفضائيات. يقول تقرير دبلوماسي غربي ان خطة متكاملة كانت قد وضعت لاحتلال بعض الساحات الكبيرة في المدن الرئيسة وبينها دمشق من قبل المتظاهرين مع وجود المراقبين، بحيث تتحول الساحات الى ما يشبه ميدان التحرير في القاهرة. لم يتحقق شيء من ذلك، لا بل تحقق العكس تماما، حصل النظام السوري على اعتراف من فريق المراقبين، وخصوصا من رئيسه الضابط السوداني محمد الدابي، بأن في المدن والارياف السورية مسلحين.

وجد النظام السوري في المراقبين ما كان يبحث عنه طويلا. حصل على اعتراف عربي بوجود مسلحين من جهة، وعلى غطاء روسي للقضاء على المسلحين من جهة ثانية. يضاف الى كل ذلك ان قطاعات من الشعب السوري صارت تشعر بضيق شديد من انعدام الأمن في مناطقها فصارت تطلب وجود الجيش حتى ولو كانت ضمنياً من تيار المعارضة.

مصالح جيوسياسية

القراءة الامنية السورية استقرت على ان استمرار الوضع على ما هو عليه، يعني السماح بتوسيع رقعة المسلحين وتشجيع الناس على التظاهر أكثر. انتشر السلاح على نحو بات يهدد بـ"كسر هيبة" الدولة التي أصيبت أصلا بلكمات كثيرة كان أبرزها تفجير أبرز مقار الأمن والاستخبارات في دمشق.

من الصعب تصور اتخاذ القرار الامني بالحسم من دون تنسيق دقيق مع الروس وعلى الأرجح مع الايرانيين. المعركة لم تعد محصورة بسوريا. تسلسل الأحداث يوحي بأن موسكو وطهران ودمشق تخوض من على الأراضي السورية حربا استراتيجية بامتياز. لا مجال للفشل أو التراجع. الحسم الكامل اذاً هو الخيار الاستراتيجي. لن تكون حمص وحماه وغيرهما استثناء بعد السيطرة على ريف دمشق. الدعم الروسي لا يقتصر على السياسة وانما ثمة تنسيق أمني دقيق جدا وأسلحة روسية جاءت الى ميناء طرطوس مرارا.

لم ينتبه كثيرون الى الكلام الخطير الذي أدلى به وزير الخارجية الروسي قبل أيام. قال الدبلوماسي العريق ان بعض دول مجلس الامن يستخدم الوضع في سوريا لتحقيق مصالح جيوسياسية ذاتية وان "هذا الموقف هو من القرن الماضي ويعكس سيكولوجيا قديمة ينبغي التخلص منها". وصل الأمر بالرجل الى حد توجيه اتهامات مبطنة لدول الخليج، كلام ما كان وليد المعلم نفسه سيقول أقسى منه في توصيف ما يحصل دوليا وعربيا.

لن يقف الامر عند هذا الحد. سيقول سيرغي لافروف في مؤتمر ميونيخ المقبل بشأن الأمن والذي يعقد في الرابع من شباط الحالي كلاما قاسيا حول عملية الاطلسي في ليبيا. لم يهضم الروس مطلقا ما يصفونه بـ"الخديعة" الاطلسية التي انطلقت من شعار إنساني ضد العقيد معمر القذافي فانتهت بعملية عسكرية واسعة أطاحت النظام الليبي وبمصالح روسيا هناك.

العودة الى التصريحات الروسية حول سوريا والدرع الصاروخية والانتقادات الغربية للانتخابات في روسيا، توضح ان موسكو تريد استعادة دورها العالمي وانها قلقة من مستقبل المواجهة مع الغرب في العقود المقبلة. جاءت الازمة السورية تقدم لها وسيلة من ذهب في مواجهة المشاريع الغربية.

يقول سيرغي تشيميزوف المدير العام لمؤسسة "روس تكنولوجيا" الحكومية الروسية، ان سوريا هي باروميتر صورة روسيا في الشرق الاوسط وافريقيا. شدد هذا المسؤول الرفيع على ضرورة "تنفيذ موسكو التزاماتها جميعا في مجال التعاون العسكري والتقني مع سوريا حتى لا تفقد روسيا سوق التسلح في الشرق الاوسط وشمال افريقيا".

العالم اذاً أمام تحولات استراتيجية روسية سيطول أمدها وقد يتفعّل أكثر لو عاد فلاديمير بوتين الى السلطة في الانتخابات المقبلة. كيف يمكن لموسكو اذاً أن تقبل بخسارة ورقة كبيرة كالورقة السورية في الوقت الراهن؟

هذا الوضوح في الرؤية الروسية يتناقض تماما مع الغموض الغربي. جاء مسؤول أمني فرنسي كبير الى لبنان. أوحى كلامه بالضياع. فرنسا تتصدر قائمة العاملين على "إسقاط" الرئيس بشار الأسد لكنها لا تعرف كيف. الجيش السوري لا يوحي بتفكك قريب. القوة الامنية لا تزال بيد الرئيس الاسد. الرئيس السوري يوحي لزائريه وكان آخرهم الوزير السابق وئام وهاب بأنه في ذروة اطمئنانه الامني والسياسي. الشعب السوري منقسم وجل التقارير الدبلوماسية الغربية تؤكد ان الرئيس السوري ما زال يحتفظ بشعبية كبيرة. السفارة الاميركية في بيروت ومعها دبلوماسيون غربيون آخرون تحدثوا في الآونة الاخيرة لزوارهم عن شعبية للرئيس الاسد لا تزال تتخطى 55 أو 60 في المئة.

قالت صحيفة "الغارديان" البريطانية قبل أيام: "ان التغطية الاعلامية الغربية لما يجري في سوريا تتجاهل معلومات واستطلاعات تناقض نتائجها الانطباع السائد وهو ان الشعب السوري يريد "إطاحة" الرئيس الأسد". أشارت الصحيفة الى استطلاع للرأي جرى بتكليف من "مؤسسة قطر" كشف ان 55 في المئة من السوريين لا يرغبون برحيل رئيسها خوفا من "حرب أهلية".
سأل المسؤول الأمني الفرنسي الذي زار بيروت مؤخرا عن حقيقة السلاح والمسلحين في سوريا. قال ان باريس لا تعرف كيف يمكن "سقوط" الرئيس الاسد ولا تعرف ماذا سيحل بسوريا لو "سقط" الرئيس. أشار الى ضبابية في الموقف التركي توحي بتراجع أنقرة.
السوريون يعرفون لماذا أحجم الأتراك عن اندفاعهم حتى ولو بقيت التصريحات شاجبة. ثمة أمور أمنية لا تعرفها سوى أجهزة البلدين. ويعرف السوريون ايضا ان الجيش الاردني قتل شابا قبل فترة قصيرة لأنه حاول تهريب سلاح الى سوريا. القرار الامني الاردني حاسم بضرورة عدم التدخل. أما العراق فهو أكثر من أي وقت مضى سائر خلف الرغبة الايرانية في مساعدة سوريا اقتصاديا.

الأميركيون بدورهم حائرون. هم يريدون "إسقاط" الرئيس الاسد لأن لا خيار آخر لديهم الآن. ماذا يفعل باراك أوباما؟ هو قال منذ شهر نيسان الماضي ان على الرئيس الأسد "الرحيل". كرر الامر في بيان مشترك مع فرنسا وألمانيا وبريطانيا في منتصف آب الماضي. لم يحصل شيء. ما زال الرئيس الاسد قادرا على النزول الى قلب دمشق يخطب بشعبه دون ارتداء واق للرصاص ومعه زوجته وأبناؤه. كل يوم يمر مع بقاء الرئيس الاسد في السلطة هو خسارة لأوباما وساركوزي قبيل الانتخابات الرئاسية في بلديهما. هل يتركان الرئيس الاسد في السلطة حتى الانتخابات؟ الأمر صعب، ولكن كيف؟
لا أحد يملك جواباً. المصادر الغربية تفيد برغبة كبيرة في زيادة تسليح المعارضة. لا بد من نقل المعركة الى مرحلة أكثر دقة. المال موجود. دول الخليج دفعت الكثير في الأشهر الماضية. أقيمت خلية أزمة في فرنسا تضم الفرنسيين والاميركيين. الاتصالات مع أطراف المعارضة قائمة على قدم وساق. ليس مقبولا ترك الرئيس الاسد يربح المعركة العسكرية.

حمص تحدد المصير

على أبواب حمص سيتحدد مصير أمور كثيرة. لو سيطر الجيش السوري على المدينة كما فعل مع ريف دمشق فسيقطع الطريق على "المجلس الوطني" السوري. هذا هدف كبير. منذ أعلن رئيس المجلس برهان غليون تحالفه مع رياض الاسعد صار السلاح والمسلحون محسوبين على المجلس. الخطة الامنية السورية واضحة الاهداف. كل مسلح هو مشروع قتيل. القرار المركزي السوري جازم في هذا السياق. باتت الاولوية هي القضاء على المسلحين وبعدها تعود السياسة.

لم يغلق الروسي أبواب مجلس الامن بعد. هم ينتظرون على الارجح ماذا سيفعل الرئيس الاسد أمنيا. قد تصبح حمص هي الباروميتر، قد يدخلها الجيش السوري بمعركة كبيرة، وقد لا يدخلها لو حصلت تسوية في مجلس الامن.

من مصلحة روسيا في الوقت الراهن التفاوض باسم نظام قوي. لمصلحتها اذاً أن يسيطر الجيش السوري على أكبر عدد من المناطق. السياسة بعد وضع عسكري قوي أفضل من السياسة في ظل هشاشة نظام.

قال فيتالي تشوركين سفير روسيا في مجلس الامن: "لقد وجدنا في مشروع القرار المغربي بعض العناصر التي كانت في مسودتنا وهذا يساعد على الأمل". ترك الدبلوماسي الروسي الباب مفتوحا لتسوية ما. تريد موسكو قرارا يقتصر على 3 أهداف حددها لافروف، وهي وقف العنف من قبل كل الاطراف، وعدم السماح بتدخل عسكري خارجي، والدعوة لمؤتمر حوار ومصالحة.

ماذا يفعل الروس لو وصل الحسم العسكري الى أبواب حمص؟ هنا بالضبط سيمارسون أقصى الضغوط على نظرائهم الغربيين. هم لا يريدون ضمنيا وقوع مجزرة. هذا سيضعهم في موقف أضعف، ولكنهم قد يوظفون ذلك لفرض وجهة نظرهم القائلة بأنه لا بد من حوار سوري - سوري لإنقاذ سوريا وربما ايضا لإنقاذ ماء وجه المطالبين "بإسقاط" الرئيس الاسد من دون القدرة على "إسقاطه".
حدد لافروف قبل ايام قليلة خطوطا جاذبة للغرب حيال تسوية روسية ممكنة. قال ان "موسكو ليست حليفة لبشار الاسد، وان السوريين هم الذين سيقررون كيف يدار بلدهم ولا أعتقد ان السياسة الروسية تتمثل في مطالبة الناس بالاستقالة. تغيير الانظمة ليس مهمتنا".
هذا الكلام يرضي الغرب ولا يزعج سوريا. فروسيا تريد حوارا بين السلطة والمعارضة من دون شروط مسبقة. لو توصل الحوار الى تشكيل حكومة وحدة وطنية تشرف على انتخابات مقبلة وأدت تلك الانتخابات الى "رحيل" الرئيس الاسد فلا بأس، أما ان يتم اللجوء الى القوة العسكرية أو التدخلات الخارجية لذلك فإن موسكو مستمرة في رفضها لذلك.

ماذا تقول المعارضة؟

تقول إن الحسم العسكري غير ممكن لان في البيوت أناسا يحمون المسلحين. وتقول ان موسكو "تبيع وتشتري" ولو وجدت مصلحتها في البيع فلن تتردد. التطمينات الغربية كثيرة بأن العقوبات المفروضة على النظام والضغوط العسكرية على الارض وفقدان جل علاقات سوريا مع العرب والغرب ستؤدي الى "سقوط النظام". تؤكد المعارضة ان "سقوط" الرئيس الاسد بات مسألة وقت، ولكنها لا تقدم إجابات شافية حول كيفية ذلك.

وفي المعارضة رأيان: أولهما في "المجلس الوطني" الذي يراد له غربيا في الوقت الراهن توسيع الأفق بحيث يتوسع الى "طوائف وأقليات" وتيارات اخرى ولا يقتصر في معظمه على "الاخوان المسلمين". وثانيهما تعبر عنه "هيئة التنسيق" وفي مقدمها هيثم المناع. نجح الرجل حتى الآن في جمع الكثير من الخيوط. لم يسلم أوراقه الى طرف واحد. الجميع يسعى للتقرب منه بدءا بواشنطن مرورا بباريس وصولا الى موسكو. ولعله أكثر أطراف المعارضة قبولا حتى اليوم في الداخل السوري. موسكو تريده محاورا للنظام، وايران تعرفه ودمشق مستعدة للانفتاح عليه.

يضاف الى التيارين، العامل الكردي. هذه مسالة أكثر تعقيدا. تبين من خلال المؤتمر الذي عقد في اربيل العراقية وتحت جناحي مسعود البرزاني ان الاكراد يحسبون بدقة كل خطوة نحو مستقبلهم. لا ينظر الاكراد فقط لما يحصل في سوريا وانما تتشتت أنظارهم بين سوريا وتركيا والعراق وايران. أي خطوة غير محسوبة قد تأتي بنتائج سلبية. هم رفعوا شعارا لا يستطيع أي معارض سوري ان يمنحهم إياه: "حق تقرير المصير ضمن الوحدة السورية". هذا إنذار ليس لسوريا فقط بل ايضا لتركيا وايران

انفراج أم انفجار؟

قرار الحسم العسكري السوري ما كان ليحصل لولا القناعة الداخلية اولا بأن السلاح قد يخرج عن القدرة على ضبطه، ولولا الغطاء الروسي والدعم الايراني.

تحاول طهران منذ فترة لعب دور كبير وبعيد عن الاضواء مع تركيا. جرت اتصالات كثيرة بين الجانبين. تزامن ذلك مع انفتاح ايراني جديد على وكالة الطاقة الدولية التي أنهى وفدها 3 أيام دون عوائق في ايران. يحكى عن رسائل نقلتها تركيا الى بعض الدول الغربية بشأن البرنامج النووي الايراني. وتزامن ذلك أيضا مع توتر شديد في العلاقات بين أنقرة وباريس على خلفية تبني قانون يجرّم إنكار إبادة الارمن.

يحار الغرب حاليا في التعاطي مع ايران. اسرائيل تكثف الضغوط. ينذر قادتها بعمل عسكري وشيك. ترد طهران وتهدد بإغلاق مضيق هرمز. يترنح سعر برميل النفط. يقلق أنصار أوباما من سقوط محتم لو تخطى سعر البرميل عتبة 130 دولارا. تتسارع وتيرة المبعوثين الاميركيين الى المنطقة لتهدئة الاندفاع الاسرائيلي. تسري وعود قاطعة بخنق ايران اقتصاديا ونفطيا. تنبري السعودية للتأكيد على انها ستعوض النقص النفطي في اسواق العالم.

يعتقد الغربيون أن تشديد الخناق على ايران كبير الاهمية في الوقت الراهن. سيعملون أيضا على تحويل الانتخابات الايرانية القريبة الى مشكلة داخلية ايرانية. سيصار الى تأجيج المعارضة الداخلية وإسماع أصوات كثيرة من الخارج، وثمة من يتحدث عن احتمال وقوع حوادث امنية ومصادمات عنيفة.

من الصعب تصور ايران متفرجة على محاولات خنقها من دون تحريك ساكن. ثمة من يصل الى حد القول بأنها قد لا تتردد في اللجوء الى الحرب لو ضاقت عليها السبل. يقول آخرون ان ذلك مستحيل لان الايرانيين هم أسياد من فاوض ومن أتقن لعبة التقدم والتراجع. لم يلعب الايرانيون كل أوراقهم بعد وهي كثيرة من العراق الى البحرين واليمن وصولا الى لبنان وأفغانستان.

لكن ثمة من يقول ان ايران باشرت فعليا الحرب. الحسم العسكري في سوريا هو البداية الفعلية. يقال ان مسؤولا عسكريا ايرانيا كبيرا جاء الى دمشق مؤخرا حاملا رسالة واضحة من مرشد الثورة الاسلامية الامام علي خامنئي مفادها ان ايران بناسها وقيادتها وجيشها ستكون الى جانب سوريا إذا تعرضت لأي هجوم. حامل الرسالة قيادي معروف بأنه لا ينقل رسائل كلامية بل يقرنها بالفعل.

تحركت ايران ايضا ومجددا صوب حركتي حماس والجهاد. أُعيد نسج بعض الخيوط التي كادت تنقطع مع حماس رغم كل الضغوط الخليجية. استقبل خامنئي الامين العام لحركة الجهاد الاسلامي رمضان عبد الله شلح . قال بحضوره: "ان الهدف الرئيس لمخطط أميركا وبعض دول المنطقة في سوريا هو توجيه ضربة الى جبهة المقاومة لان سوريا تدعم المقاومة الفلسطينية والمقاومة الاسلامية". كرر مقولته الشهيرة في مناسبات كهذه: "ان النصر الالهي سيتحقق حتما".

حين تتحدث ايران عن "النصر الالهي" تكون يدها على الزناد، ولكن يدها الاخرى على ملفات التفاوض. ليس رمضان شلح من الزوار الذين تتم معهم مناقشة قضايا دبلوماسية...

السباق محموم أكثر من أي وقت مضى بين الانفراج والانفجار. لكن المشكلة تكمن الآن في أن أوباما وساركوزي في أوج حملتهما الانتخابية، فلا الحرب مضمونة ولا التراجع صوب تسوية مفيد. سوريا تحاول ربح الوقت، ولكن الاوقات لا تزال صعبة تماما للخروج من أزمتها المفتوحة على كل الاحتمالات.

من يضمن نجاح الحسم العسكري. ولو نجح فماذا عن مستقبل علاقة السلطة بالجزء المعارض من الشعب؟ ماذا عن مستقبل السياسة، وهل تكفي خطوات جذرية في داخل مؤتمر حزب البعث، أو تغيير للدستور أو تشكيل أحزاب وقانون إعلام جديد "لوأد الفتنة"؟
تبدو سوريا، أكثر من أي وقت مضى، أمام أكثر أوقاتها خطورة. وحين ينحصر الكلام بالسلاح، تصبح الرؤية محجوبة تماما خلف غبار المعارك، خصوصا اذا ما كان خصوم الرئيس الاسد يريدون رحيله مهما كلف الثمن، وهو سيحافظ على البقاء مهما كلف الثمن. هي معركة إقليمية ودولية بامتياز تجري على أرض سوريا وبدماء السوريين.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

What Hamas wants? Whatever you try, today, you will not get a Hamas clear answer to the Question: Is Qatar and Saudi are supported resistance? Or others?

2012-02-03T13:58:00.001+04:00

What Hamas wants?

Fidaa' Itani

Shortly before, one of the top leaders of Hamas visited Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah. During the long dialogue, The Hamas Leader advised Hezbollah to follow Hamas steps to avoid somewhat the negative repercussions of events in Syria on the image of the party and its Secretary General, and let the wave of revolutions in the Arabic region pass without negative repercussions on resistance movements.

Of course, the answer the Secretary General came consistent with what has already been announced across media, and elaborated on the details and explained to guest, Hezbollah reviews on what is going on in Syria, but those reviews does not abrogate the Fundamentals of the ongoing conflict in Syria and the region.

Hamas can, for its part, look at things in a completely different way. Her account of events has different context, and different platforms, and different vision. Though it is difficult today to obtain direct and frank dialogue for publication with the Hamas leaders and cadres, however, the logic of Hamas vision can be deduced from the dialogues with the cadres, and cadres and the commander's dialogues with other political parties.

Syria live more dangerous days ...

Is the "fall" President Assad really inevitable?

First: Hamas did not see in what is happening in the Arabic region and in Syria uprisings or conspiracies, or simply foreign intervention leading to revolutions. Hamas (the majority of its leadership) believe the name of what is happening in the Arabic region, and Syria is «revolutions». What's today in Syria is revolution, not riot, sabotage and protests and an insurrection, but literally «revolution».

Second: The revolutions in Arabic region is not a result of a Western conspiracy, in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya the Blur situation is natural blur as the case in all revolutions the revolution needs time and flipped itself several times, change its policies to the stage, before settling on the final state, so the Arabic revolutions need time before reaching its happy conclusions.

Rats desert a sinking ship, fools ride

Third: It's unfair to mark such revolutions as brotherhoods revolutions, or to say that the brotherhood carrying out western agenda, these revolutions are the result of local conditions, and the brothers aren't the only ones of shaped or led it, though their role was prominent in most, but in return they will not monopolize power alone in any way.

Fourth:

Muhammad Salem Awa, a leading Brother,
condemned the attack on Israel’s embassy.

At the end of the current blur situation, and after passing the compulsory revolutionary path, the end result will be positive for the Palestinian cause, the main concern for Hamas first. The positive indicators, namely the position of the peoples towards the Palestinian issue, are clear; the revolution emerged in search of freedom, after the Suppression and prevention of Arabic peoples from expressing its deep sympathy with the Palestinian cause, and defending of Islamic sanctities.

Fifth:

Hamas is a resistance movement, which arose to resist the Israeli occupation, and Liberate the land and holy places, from that basis it deals with the region around and retain its right to have political ties with various parties, but conversely Hamas is not regional player between parties, nor looking for intervention in Arab situations either of this or that State, although sometimes it plays «Assistant role in resolving internal conflicts»

Sixth: Hamas earlier and perhaps current positions on a number of brotherhood movements, both during the Lebanon crisis at some point after the assassination of Rafik Hariri, and the Lebanon's Jamaa' Islamiya position split that prevailed at that stage, and finally the Tunisia brotherhood remarks to Israeli radio. What governs the political position of Hamas is not seeking power as accuses by its opponents, but the main interest is the process of liberation the land.

All this, plus many other points could be added to clarify what Hamas wants. But putting the logic «reluctance» axis appear to create confusion among the Palestinian Islamic resistance movement, which until near yesterday was keystone in this axis, which wasn't mentioned without the name of its corners Iran, Syria and Hezbollah and Hamas inevitably. Hamas prefer today to say «our relationships are good with all parties, especially those who support our cause in resistance». Whatever you try, today, you will not get a Hamas clear answer to the Question: Is Qatar and Saudi are supported resistance? Or others? No answer, but definitely "We don't trust «United States», the Hamas speaker will alerts you.

Syria and Hamas Blame not Break commented
Lebanese Wadi Khaled is base for "Free Army" militia operations against Syria

Iranian President affirms his country's support for Syria under any circumstances

President al-Assad stresses to Wahhab: Syria's steadfastness will make a qualitative change in the conflict on the region

Salehi: Syria is Targeted due to its Support to Resistance
TEHRAN, (SANA)_Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said that the campaign against Syria is due to its being the resistance ''strongest link'' in the region...Read more

A Lebanese Confesses to Involvement in Smuggling Weapons from Wadi Khaled to Tal Kalakh
DAMASCUS, SANA_ Fadi Faisal Moussa, a Lebanese national, has confessed to his participation, along with a group, in smuggling weapons from Wadi Khaled area in Lebanon to Tal Kalakh in Syria in coordination with another Lebanese man in Wadi Khalid...Read more

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON IN SYRIA: INSIDER UPDATE

2012-02-03T13:45:00.002+04:00

A Syrian boy, with writing on his forehead that reads "Syria is protected by God," stands in front of a picture of Syrian President Bashar Assad outside the Syrian embassy in Beirut.

By Boris DOLGOVICF

February 01, 2012

The current situation in Syria remains one of the most important components of the Middle Eastern and international policies. Using Syria’s domestic crisis and pursuing their own goals NATO, Israel, Turkey and the monarchies of the Persian Gulf are trying to undermine the Syrian regime.

Since the beginning of the crisis in Syria I have made two trips to that country as a member of international delegations in August 2011 and in January 2012.

If we watch the dynamics of situation’s development over that period on the one hand we can state intensification of terrorist groups in Syria and on the other hand we see a broader people’s support of President Bashar Assad and a clear demarcation of political forces’ positions.

TERRORIST ATTACKS IN AND AGAINST SYRIA

In the last two months Syria has seen a number of terrorist attacks.

The terrorist attacked Syrian servicemen and military facilities, law enforcement agencies institutions, blasts on oil pipelines, railroads, murders and taking of hostage among peaceful citizens (In the city of Homs insurgents killed five well known scientists), arson of schools and killing of teachers (since March 2011, 900 schools have been set on fire and 30 teachers have been killed).

Terrorist attacks in Damascus became among the bloodiest. Two of them were carried out on December 23, 2011 when cars loaded with explosives went off in front of the buildings of state security service killing 44 and injured about 150 people.

On January 6, 2012 on a busy street a suicide bomber attack killed 26 and wounded 60. There were officers of the law enforcement agencies among the victims but most of the victims were occasional by-passers.

STREET LIFE

In January 2012, Damascus has a more severe look in comparison with summer of 2011. Security officers check passports on the way to the airport, asking people what country they are from.

Entrances of many state institutions are protected with concrete blocks. There are check points with sand bags near the police stations which are protected by soldiers in bullet proof vests. Lifting gates which close entrances to some of the streets are also by guarded by soldiers and young people with machine guns ~ these are volunteers from pro-governmental youth movements.

But everyday life has not drastically changed. There are no servicemen, armed vehicles or document checks in the city. Damascus is still a busy city, with no vacant seats in internet cafes and on weekends streets are crowded with family couples and young people.

POPULAR SUPPORT FOR BASHAR ASSAD

After terrorist attacks in Damascus demonstrations with slogans supporting Bashar Assad and condemning terrorists were held every day. Similar demonstrations were organized in other large cities such as Aleppo, Homs, Hama, Daraa, Deir az Zor. These demonstrations were covered by the Syrian TV.

During our stay in Syria we could move around the city freely and speak with people as we liked but we did not see any single anti-governmental rally. Most of the rallies’ participants were young people.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad waves at supporters during a public appearance in Damascus on January 11, 2012 in which he vowed to defeat a "conspiracy" against Syria.

The most massive rally which gathered tens thousands of people was held on January 1 in the center of Damascus. At that rally Bashar Assad addressed to the nation starting his speech with the words: “Brothers and sisters!” He was speaking about a thousands year long history, the need to fight terrorism and the support terrorists receive from abroad. Assad’s speech was received with real enthusiasm and there were no signs that this reaction had been staged.

The whole square (tens of thousands of people) shouted a popular slogan “Allah, Syria, Bashar!” (“Allah, Syria va Bashar bas!”). On January 8, in the memory of victims of terrorist attacks in Damascus a commemoration ceremony was held in St. Cross Cathedral in Damascus.

SYRIANS KNOW WHO BRINGS ON THE TERRORISM

The Mufti of Syria Ahmad Badr Al-Din Hassoun, the metropolitan of the Syrian Orthodox Church and the prior of the Catholic monastery spoke at the ceremony. In their speeches they condemned

“the killers

and those who put weapons in their hands

and sent them to Syria”.

The tragedy of the mufti of Syria, whose son was killed by the members of the Islamist terrorist group after the mufti had refused to act on the side of the foreign opposition, which goal was to overthrow Bashar Assad, is a telling example in itself.

POLITICAL CHANGES, POPULAR POLITICS, PARTIES NOT AT WAR

After the adoption of a new law on political parties an active process of their creation has been underway in Syria. Although formally the constitution envisaged a multiparty system and seven parties were represented in the parliament, in compliance with clause 8 the leading role belonged to the ruling Baath party. Currently there is a wide discussion in Syria about this clause. An official with the Syrian Foreign Ministry told us that in the new constitution (on which the national referendum would be held in February), this clause would be abolished if most of the public and political forces spoke for it.

In his address to the nation Bashar Assad said that the new constitution would be approved in March 2012.

The parliamentary elections are to be held in May-June 2012.

Along with the law on political parties new laws on general elections, local administration and mass media were adopted. In compliance with the new law in December 2011 elections to the local governments were held. But because of the threat of terrorist attacks the turnout was only 42%, which was confirmed by the Baath officials. Nevertheless, the local administrations were elected and began to work. Under the recently adopted law new mass media are being formed in addition to the current 20 TV channels, 15 radio stations and 30 newspapers.

At present there are three main trends in the Syrian patriotic opposition ~ democratic, liberal and left, which is mainly a communist one. The Syrian Social Nationalist Party is the most influential party among the democratic forces. It is also the oldest party which was established in 1932.

As Iliah Saman, a member of the political bureau of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party said, the party’s program is more conservative in comparison with the Baath’s program. Nevertheless there are no differences of principle between the two parties.

According to him, the policy of the US, France and England is the main destabilizing factor in Syria. He said that those countries were acting in the interests of Israel and had the goal to divide Syria into five state formations on the basis of religious and ethnical differences.

The liberal trend of the opposition is represented by the recently registered secular democratic social movement led by Nabil Feysal, one of the Syrian intellectuals, a writer and a translator. He is an outright opponent of the Islamic fundamentalism, supporter of the liberal democracy. His goal is to turn Syria into “Middle Eastern Denmark”.

The National Committee for the Unity of Syrian Communists is the most influential component of the left (communist) trend of the opposition within the country. Recently it has changed its name to the Popular Will Party which is headed by Qadri Jamil, a prominent Syrian economist and the professor at the Damascus University. He is the only representative of the opposition who entered the committee on the design of the new constitution.

Jamil believes that the national dialogue and creation of the government of the national unity (which would include representatives of the patriotic opposition) is the only way out of the crisis. At the same time he thinks that it is necessary to remove all the politicians who are not interested in conduction of reforms from the government, to clean up the opposition from destructive factors and to suppress its radical members who tend to use violence.

The coordination committees are also significant political force which has contacts with the Popular Will Party. These committees on the one hand organize demonstrations demanding concrete reforms and better living conditions on the other hand act as self-defense units which armed people protect their districts from attacks of terrorist groups in particular from a so called Free Syrian Army.

It should be noted that although in the beginning of protests in Syria, part of the population, including intellectuals shared the opposition discontent with the regime and supported demands on democratization now, after intensification of terrorist groups, they tend to support the regime and the reforms proposed by the government.

REPORTER KILLED LOOKING FOR NON EXISTENT AUTHORITARIANISM

A telling example of terrorist crimes was the shelling of a quarter in Homs on January 11 which killed eight local residents. Giles Jacquier, a reporter with France-2 TV, became one more victim of the attack. We spoke with Jacquier shortly before his tragic death and he was convinced that peoples’ protests were suppressed by the authoritarian regime in Syria.

He was looking for the opposition everywhere trying to make a report.

On failing to find it in Damascus he moved with a group of Dutch and Swiss colleagues to Homs. But in Homs he also met people who were supporting Bashar Assad and demanding to protect them from terrorists. A group of local residents and Giles Jacquier who happened to be near came under a grenade thrower fire, which was a common thing in that district.

Commenting the tragic death of the French reporter Mother Agnes Mariam, who is the prior of the St James Catholic Cathedral in Damascus, said that there is no protesting opposition in Syria but only bandits who are killing people.

Many people we contacted in Syria including independent foreign reporters told us about the information war against Syria.

Al Jazeera stage set complete with actors and directors. The same trickery that was deployed in Tripoli and parts of Libya!

AL JAZEERA CREATES A “HOLLYWOOD SYRIA” FOR PURPOSE OF DECEPTION

According to them, Qatari channel Al Jazeera, for example, in order to broadcast a report on mass anti-governmental rallies in Syria made a fake footage with the help of computer editing using dozens of atmosphere players and decoration of Syrian streets, a kind of “Hollywood village”.

ED: On Syrian television, Thierry Meyssan revealed that Al-Jazeera just created sets (copies of) of the Umayyads and the Abbasids squares (Damascus). The channel also intends to reproduce the central squares of four provincial towns. Qatar provides significant military effort in Western military action against Syria.

As for the Syrian opposition abroad, its political part is represented by the Syrian National council with the headquarters in Istanbul. It is headed by Burhan Ghalioun, a Syrian-French political scientist at the Sorbonne University in Paris.

It is quite a heterogeneous formation which comprises groups with different goals. They represent the Muslim Brotherhood and other Sunnite organizations, Kurdish separatists, Liberal-Democratic dissidents who usually reside in Europe and in the US.
The armed opposition which conducted terrorist attacks in Syria is represented by a number of groups from a military wing of the Muslim Brotherhood to the Libyan radical Islamists and Al Qaeda.
According to the information we receive from our Syrian colleagues there are training camps for insurgents in Lebanon and Turkey.

The officers of security services of NATO, Turkey and some Arab states are in charge for the training and armament of the insurgents, while the monarchies of the Persian Gulf provide the financing.

The future development of the situation in Syria depends in many ways on the ability of the ruling regime to consolidate public forces and conduct the announced reforms.

Other priorities are the liquidation of terrorist groups and stabilization of the domestic situation.

In its turn this issue is directly linked to the development of the global policies and will depend on the activities of the leading countries of NATO, Turkey, the Arab League (which sent its monitors to Syria) Russia and China.

As for Russia,

it firmly declares that

repetition of the “Libyan scenario”

in Syria

is inadmissible.

Boris Dolgov is Cand. Sc. (History), Senior research fellow of the Centre for Arabic Studies of the Russian Institute of Oriental Studies.

Source: Strategic Culture Foundation

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Some 200,000 Missiles Aimed at Israel: Israeli Intelligence Chief

2012-02-03T09:28:00.000+04:00

Local Editor

Military Intelligence Chief Major General Aviv Kochavi said Thursday that some 200,000 missiles are aimed constantly at Israel, reiterating the Zionist entity’s concerns over Iran’s “nuclear ambitions”, Israeli daily Haaretz reported.
Speaking at the Herzliya Conference, Kochavi indicated that the threats Israel is facing are growing.

“A more hostile, more Islamic, more sensitive Middle East, one more attune to public sentiment, less controlled by the regimes, and less susceptible to international influence,” he added.

However, he also considered that "Israel's military deterrence is intact."

Kochavi estimated that “Iran is in possession of more than 4 tons of low-grade enriched uranium as well as almost 100 kilograms of uranium enriched at 20%.”

"If those are enriched more, to a 90% level, that would be enough for 4 atomic bombs," he added.


Source: Israeli Media

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Israel, the failed state!

2012-02-03T03:50:00.001+04:00

Via FLC

The American Conservative

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ki-moon triggers popular outrage among Gazans by his refusal to meet with them

2012-02-03T03:39:00.001+04:00

Ki-moon triggers popular outrage among Gazans by his refusal to meet with them

[ 02/02/2012 - 04:55 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- A state of popular anger is prevailing in the besieged Gaza Strip after UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon insolently refused to meet during his visit with families of prisoners, martyrs and war victims, or any Gazan farmer, fishermen or patient.

An informed source told the Palestinian information center (PIC) that Ki-moon, who coordinated his visit with the UNRWA, refused to include in his schedule any meeting with civilians from Gaza and listen to their suffering, and he also did not allow any of their representatives to receive him or attend his meetings with UN officials in Gaza.

The source added that Ki-moon also went too far in his bias in favor of the Israeli occupation and refused to meet with any officials from the elected government in Gaza.

Ki-moon had already refused about one year ago during a visit to the occupied Palestinian territories including Gaza to meet with families of prisoners and war victims, while he met with the family of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who was then held in Gaza.

In this regard, head of the network of NGOs in Gaza Amjad Ashawa joined the Palestinian figures who rejected the UNRWA's invitation to receive and meet with Ki-moon in protest at his refusal to meet with Gaza victims and their representatives.

For the same reason, head of Al-Mizan center for human rights, Isam Younus, and head of the culture and free thought society, Maryam Zakkut, also refused invitations to meet with the UN secretary-general.

Zakkut, a noted female human rights activist, said in a press release that Ki-moon's disregard for victimized families who are considered an important spectra of the Palestinian people did not reflect an honest intention to look into and address the suffering of Gaza civilians.
For his part, senior official of the popular front for the liberation of Palestine Rabah Muhanna said on Wednesday that Ki-moon's visit to Gaza could not succeed unless he met with political and social forces, refugees, and families of victims and prisoners, and listened to them.

He added that Ki-moon's refusal to meet with Gazans and their representatives confirmed that his visit was ceremonial and not for humanitarian purposes.

Relatives of prisoners ask Ban Ki-moon to stop bias in favor of Israel
	Relatives of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails and victims of the Israeli war on Gaza have received UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon at Beit Hanun crossing on Thursday with protest signs.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

'The US would not defend Israel if it attacked Iran unilaterally!'

2012-02-03T03:32:00.000+04:00

Via FLC

"... Dempsey's trip was highly unusual, in that there was neither a press conference.... Even more remarkable, no leak about what he said to the Israelis has appeared in either U.S. or Israeli news media, indicating that both sides have regarded what Dempsey said as extremely sensitive....
The message carried by Dempsey was the first explicit statement to the Netanyahu government that the United States would not defend Israel if it attacked Iran unilaterally. But Defence Secretary Leon Panetta had given a clear hint in an interview on "Face the Nation" Jan. 8 that the Obama administration would not help defend Israel in a war against Iran that Israel had initiated.
Asked how the United States would react if Israel were to launch a unilateral attack on Iran, Panetta first emphasised the need for a coordinated policy toward Iran with Israel. But when host Bob Schieffer repeated the question, Panetta said, "If the Israelis made that decision, we would have to be prepared to protect our forces in that situation. And that's what we'd be concerned about." ...
There has been no evidence since the Dempsey visit of any change in the Netanyahu government's insistence on maintaining its freedom of action to attack Iran....
A former U.S. intelligence analyst who followed the Israeli military closely told IPS he strongly suspects that the IDF has pressed Barak to insist that the Israeli force be at the peak of readiness if and when they are asked to attack Iran.

The analyst, who insisted on anonymity because of his continuing contacts with U.S. military and intelligence personnel, said the 2006 Lebanon War debacle continues to haunt the thinking of IDF leaders. In that war, it became clear that the IDF had not been ready to handle Hezbollah rocket attacks adequately, and the prestige of the Israeli military suffered a serious blow.
The insistence of IDF leaders that they never go to war before being fully prepared is a primary consideration for Barak, according to the analyst. "Austere Challenge '12" would inevitably involve a major consumption of military resources, he observes, which would reduce Israeli readiness for war in the short run.
The concern about a major military exercise actually reducing the IDF's readiness for war against Iran would explain why senior Israeli military officials were reported to have suggested that the reasons for the postponement were mostly "technical and logistical".
The Israeli military concern about expending scarce resources on the exercise would apply, of course, regardless of whether the exercise was planned for April or late 2012. That fact would help explain why the exercise has not been rescheduled, despite statements from the U.S. side that it will be.
The U.S. military, however, has its own reasons for being unenthusiastic about the exercise. IPS has learned from a knowledgeable source that, well before the Obama administration began distancing itself from Israel's Iran policy, U.S. Central Command chief James N. Mattis had expressed concern about the implications of an exercise so obviously based on a scenario involving Iranian retaliation for an Israeli attack.
U.S. officials have been quoted as suspecting that the Israeli request for a postponement of the exercise indicated that Israel wanted to leave its options open for conducting a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities in the spring. But a postponement to the fall would not change that problem.
For that reason, the former U.S. intelligence analyst told IPS he doubts that "Austere Challenge '12" will ever be carried out..."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ledha Socratous: Gilad Atzmon: politics and jazz

2012-02-03T03:27:00.000+04:00

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 9:01PM Gilad Atzmon

http://www.cyprus-mail.com/

THE SELF-proclaimed “self-hating Jew”, Gilad Atzmon will be visiting Cyprus this week to present his new book and give a talk at the University of Cyprus tomorrow....

With a strong presence on and off stage, Atzmon has a huge following not only for his music but for being a unique thinker and philosopher. Admired for his fearless stance against oppression, he is also at the forefront of a taboo discourse that many will not venture into out of fear of being branded anti-Semite. He has published quite a few books and articles blasting Israel in the past, but this time it seems his latest offering has opened up Pandora’s Box and ignited a fierce debate from all corners of society.

In The Wandering Who?, he traces his own development from a young, rather typical Israeli, brought up in a conservative, secular Zionist family, to become a staunch opponent of Zionism and of the State of Israel. But his book is far more than a personal story. He challenges the myths and the tribal mindset underpinning the founding of the Zionist state and its racially-driven policies. It is an attempt to understand what motivates secular people of a Jewish background to continue to identify themselves as Jews. It is also an attempt to demonstrate the harmful consequences of Jewish identity, particularly when this is not based on Jewish religion.

Atzmon’s 4pm talk on Thursday is entitled The Primacy of the Ear and offers an alternative take on the Israeli Palestinian conflict and peace activism. The talk will follow Atzmon’s personal story and his struggle with Arabic music leading to a rejection of phenomenology and what he has called the Primacy of the Eye.

If you don’t want get embroiled in the political verbal joust, jazz fans will be keen to hear that on Friday and Saturday, Atzmon will let the music do all the talking, with two concerts at the JazzyB in Limassol. Accompanying Atzmon’s alto sax on stage at JazzyB will be George Morfitis on piano, Cahit Koutrafali on bass and Stelios Xydias on drums.

Through the years Atzmon has managed to merge the music of the Middle East and Eastern Europe with jazz and contemporary improvised music. Atzmon has virtually created a genre of his own with his maverick borrowings from so many different sources. In addition to being influenced by Coltrane’s powerful approach on the sax, Atzmon’s live performances can be simply breathtaking and overwhelming. The two shows are likely to be very popular, so make sure to book your spot to avoid dissapointment.

The Primacy of the Ear
Jazz master saxophonist and philosopher Gilad Atzmon presents his new book on Jewish identity and gives a talk. February 2. University of Cyprus. 4pm.

February 3 &4: Jazz concerts with Atzmon and Co. JazzyB, situated on the corner of Anexartisias and Athinon, Limassol. 10.30pm. €10. Jazz fans should avoid disappointment by booking early. Tel: 99-605502

Gilad Atzmon's New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of Zionist's global interests and influence Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Who's there?

2012-02-03T03:04:00.000+04:00

Genius!!!

Wednesday, February 1, 2012 at 10:43PM

Gilad Atzmon

Gilad Atzmon's New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of Zionification of the West Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.

iver to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Mourning and Sacking following Egypt Football Massacre

2012-02-03T02:59:00.000+04:00

Local Editor

A man reading qura'n on Thursday next to the body

of his brother, who was killed at Port Said stadium.

Egypt announced three days of national mourning following the horrible football massacre that claimed the lives of 74 people and injured hundreds others.

The rioting in the northern city of Port Said on Wednesday night marked one of the deadliest incidents in football history and sent shares on the Cairo stock exchange plunging in Thursday trade.

Prime Minister Kamal al-Ganzuri told an emergency session of parliament on the tragedy that the Egyptian football association's director and management board had been sacked, as had the Port Said security chief.

Ganzuri added that the governor of Port Said had resigned his post and his resignation accepted.

LACK OF SECURITY
Angry members of parliament denounced the lack of security at the match and gathered for an emergency session on Thursday.

"Egypt went through a difficult night yesterday. Egypt spent its night crying [over] its dead," parliament speaker Saad Katatni said in the session's opening remarks.

Clashes erupted as soon as the referee blew the final whistle in a match which saw home team Al-Masri beat Cairo's Al-Ahly 3-1.

Al-Masri fans flooded the pitch, throwing rocks, bottles and fireworks at Al-Ahly supporters, causing chaos and panic as players and fans ran in all directions trying to flee, witnesses said.
Photos of bleeding players circulated on the Internet.

Gunfire was also reported on the main road leading to Port Said from Cairo, and troops were deployed to prevent further clashes.

Egypt's interior minister, Mohamed Ibrahim, said many of the victims had died in a crush of people at the stadium.
At least 52 people have been arrested and authorities said the search for suspects linked to the violence was continuing.

RALLIES
Activists scheduled rallies for Thursday outside the headquarters of the interior ministry in Cairo to protest against the inability of police to stop the bloodshed.

In Port Said, residents marched early on Thursday, denouncing the violence and saying it was a conspiracy by the military and police to cause chaos.

Egypt had witnessed, since former president Hosni Mubarak was ousted last year, rallies against the ruling military Council.
Mubarak was ousted last February following a popular uprising that left hundreds dead.

The former president is now on trial. He has been accused of ordering police to kill protesters.


Source: Agencies

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

William J. Murray knocks Alison Weir's camera across room at CNI press conference

2012-02-03T02:57:00.000+04:00

Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 12:38AM Gilad Atzmon

We want Press TV on our TV screens!!!

After a CNI press conference on Monday May 23rd at the National Press Club a pro-Israel supporter assaulted Alison Weir, Press TV filmed the incident. We have identified the assailant as William J. Murray who, along with Gen. Jerry Boykin, was preparing for a pro-Israel press conference

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"Russian diplomats do not cancel previously scheduled meetings" to babble about Syria!

2012-02-03T00:00:00.000+04:00

Via FLC

MOSCOW - Even before Morocco (Muslim Brotherhood + Monarch) officially proposed a UN Security Council resolution condemning the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, it was clear that Russia, which has veto power in the Security Council, would stand in the way.

Moscow had already expressed its disagreement with language in the resolution that places the blame for recent violence squarely on al-Assad’s shoulders, and calls for his removal from power. Moscow is also worried that if the resolution against Syria, a major Russian ally, is adopted by the Security Council, the West will see it as a green light for international forces to intervene, just as happened last year in Libya. Russia had compromised with the West on Libya by agreeing to abstain from the vote on Libya, but it was not happy about the NATO bombing that followed.

Things are likely to be different with Syria. The Kremlin is not about to give in to pressure from the West, particularly in light of upcoming presidential elections.

The West pulled out the heavy hitters for Tuesday's Security Council meeting. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppé and British Foreign Minister William Hague all converged in New York. The Arab League’s General Secretary Nabil El-Araby represented the Arab point of view. But Moscow made its point clearly by not sending someone of the same level to take part in the discussions: Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov continued his tour of Asia and Oceania uninterrupted, rather than veering off to New York.

... Washington did not hide its annoyance that Clinton was not able to reach Lavrov and to discuss the upcoming vote with him. According to State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, Clinton's "phone was ringing constantly,” for discussions with colleagues from various different countries, but the Russian Foreign Secretary remained unreachable. “The Secretary, frankly, has been trying to get Foreign Minister Lavrov on the phone for about 24 hours,” Nuland said, noting that Clinton had no trouble speaking with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi.

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry, Lavrov was informed of Clinton’s wish to speak with him, but the timing conflicted with his meetings with Australian officials. “Russian diplomats do not cancel previously scheduled meetings,” Lavrov explained, adding that he was ready to speak with Secretary of State Clinton “at the slightest opportunity.”

Regardless, the chances that the two diplomats can find common ground on the Syrian problem is essentially zero. From Australia, Lavrov commented on the Syrian opposition’s refusal to negotiate with the al-Assad government, talks that Russia had offered to organize. “If the opposition refuses to sit at the same negotiating table with the regime, then what are the alternatives? To bomb them? We have already been there, and the Security Council will not ever give its blessing to a bombing campaign - I guarantee it.”
... at least six concrete reasons why Russia is not likely to give in.
1. Syria is one of Russia’s most important allies in the Arab world. If Moscow abandons Damascus in this critical moment, then the message it will be sending to allies around the world is that one cannot rely on the Kremlin.
2. Damascus is one of Moscow’s most important trading partners, particularly in military technology. The military contracts that were signed in the past years were worth about $4 billion. In 2010 alone, Syria acquired about $700 million worth of Russian arms. Moscow recently approved the sale of 36 military planes to Damascus - for a sum of $550 million. The total Russian investment in the Syrian economy is around $20 million. One of the largest projects is a gas processing plant managed by a Russian company...
3. Russia’s only military base located outside of the former Soviet Union is in the Syrian port city of Tartus. ...
4. Russia is wary of the uncompromising Syrian opposition. Its leaders are oriented towards the Persian Gulf monarchs, towards Turkey and towards the West, but not in the least towards Moscow. In addition, among Bashar al Assad’s opponents, Islamists have a relatively strong position, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. If they come to power in Syria, which is home to a relatively large number of Christians and Shiites, there is a real risk that the country will be splintered based on religion.
5. The Russian leadership clearly doesn’t believe the West’s promises that the resolution on Syria is not a steps towards a military intervention...
6. As important as international relations are, Russian internal politics also plays a major role in this affair. A month before the presidential elections, Vladimir Putin does not want to appear weak to either voters or his opponents ..."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Shahenda Maklad: The Lifelong Trip to Tahrir

2012-02-02T23:37:00.000+04:00

Maklad’s heart still beats to the rhythm of militancy and freedom. She is now 74 years old, but despite her old age and feeble body, her memory is as sharp as ever. (Photo: Al-Akhbar)

By: Radwan Adam

Published Thursday, February 2, 2012

In 1965, international revolutionary figure Ernesto “Che” Guevara, accompanied by late Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, made a stop in Kamshish, a small village in the Governorate of Menoufiya, north of Cairo. There, with a wide grin and twinkling eyes, he saluted the young woman, who dared to rebel against feudalism, and her peasant friends.

She shook his hand and the presidential convoy was soon on its way. Yet, this encounter left an image that cannot be erased from the mind of fierce militant Shahenda Maklad.

Maklad keeps a large picture of Guevara next to one of her husband, Communist activist Salah Hussain who died in 1966, just one year before Guevara.

“They are both the same for me, they both fought against exploitation and slavery,” she says as tears welled up in her eyes.

She cries for the husband whom she fought next to in the armed resistance against feudal lords. She tries to escape this painful feeling, but pictures of her old companion fill every corner of her house. She sips some water, but soon more tears stream down her face. This time, they are tears of joy. The January 25 Egyptian revolution has filled her heart with joy.

Maklad’s heart still beats to the rhythm of militancy and freedom. She is now 74 years old, but despite her old age and feeble body, her memory is as sharp as ever.

Maklad descended from a bourgeois family. As a child, she had an early taste of adventure with her father, Abdul-Hamid Shawki Maklad, a senior police officer and intellectual.

“He was a great oud player. If his father, the mayor, had not forced him to join police academy, he would have played the oud player in Umm Kulthum’s band,” she says.

Maklad was the eldest daughter in her family and had four younger brothers. She was very close to her father, even more so than to her “kind, yet unadventurous,” mother.

At an early age she had to confront the contradictions of class in Egyptian society. Despite his class background, her father would frequently have discussions about socialism with her, giving her an early grasp of the root of those contradictions.

It wasn’t until years later that Maklad understood why her father used to “refuse to order breaking up popular demonstrations after our defeat in the Palestine war in 1948.”

Maklad’s father – who sent a telegram to Nasser saying “if you do not release the peasants of Kamshish, who were detained for revolting against feudalism, then detain me with them” – always urged his daughter to defend her opinion until her dying breath.

He supported her and empowered her to separate from her officer husband, whom she didn’t love. He did this so she would be able to marry Salah Hussain, who had just returned at that time to Kamshish.
Prior to his return to the village, Hussain was arrested for organizing the peasants’ movement, in addition to students. He had been training them to take up arms to face the Feki family.

The Feki family owned the village and the peasants who lived in it. The family ruled with terror and oppression, treating peasants in a disdainful and demeaning manner. The family prevented peasants from continuing their education or even from looking any one of the family members in the eye.
Hence, it is not surprising that the armed peasant struggle Hussain led in 1953 was the fiercest battle against feudalism. He was arrested and imprisoned for a year, as the Nasser regime was a reformist and not a radical one when it came to reclaiming lands from the Feki family.

“The land was not redistributed to peasants until five years after the armed struggle, in which dozens were killed...nevertheless, that was not the end of the battle with feudalism in the village,” declares Maklad.

On 30 April 1966, Maklad collapsed in her home in Alexandria, when she received the news that her husband had been assassinated by the Feki family in Kamshish.

The then mother of three (one of which was a new-born) pulled herself together and went down to Kamshish. She carried the casket of her husband, the martyr of the revolutionary peasants’ movement.
There, the funeral turned into a popular demonstration. Maklad shouted at the top of her lungs, “Salah is a martyr, and a martyr never dies.”

The color black soon dominated her wardrobe, as she was in a constant state of mourning. The stream of bad news seemed endless, the last of which was the death of her son Wassim in Russia, soon followed by that of her brother and cousin.

“After the death of Wassim, I thought I was finished and that it was the end of me. But the January revolution brought me back to life once more,” she says.

In her early youth, Maklad joined the armed movement with her Marxist partner. After his death, she decided to follow in his footsteps and continue in the path of struggle and militancy. She soon became a national and international icon.

“Jean Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, and Nasser visited me to give me their condolences. We greeted them with chants calling for ‘freedom and the fall of feudalism,’” says Maklad.

Maklad was imprisoned twice in her life. The first time was in 1971 when she was sent to Alexandria at the height of the armed conflict with feudalism, which was in its last throes.

Maklad was imprisoned again in 2 January 1981 on charges of belonging to the Egyptian Communist Party. Then, poet Ahmad Fouad Negm, who he himself was jailed multiple times for his controversial poetry, dedicated a poem to Maklad titled “The Nile.”

Feudalism resurfaced again in the era of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Maklad never stopped struggling against it.

On 23 December 2011, she led a women’s march that comprised of over one million Egyptian women to Tahrir Square, in order to restore the honor of young Egyptian women who were subjected to humiliating virginity tests by the soldiers of the Egyptian army.

When asked about her position on the Islamists’ victory in the recent parliamentary elections, she said she doesn’t accord any weight to it.

“Their victory was merely a matter of seizing the right moment in history. They exploited people’s poverty and their distorted awareness. The people will eventually awaken from this state of confusion. It is good for the people to try Islamist rule now, because they are drained,” she says.
“The people are leftists. Egypt is leftists. Egypt will return to them and they will return to her, once they recover. Tahrir Square will forever be our weapon and the people’s general assembly,” she concludes.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Ban Comes under Shower of Shoes in Gaza Visit

2012-02-02T23:03:00.000+04:00

Local Editor

UN Chief Ban Ki-moon was met by shoes on Thursday as he paid a visit to Gaza strip.

As the UN leader entered the Palestinian territory, protesters threw shoes, sand and small stones at his convoy, which was briefly held up before continuing on to Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip.
A crowd of around 50 demonstrators, most of them relatives of Palestinians in Israeli jails, said they were protesting the fact that Ban was not meeting with them or Palestinian prisoner groups during his brief trip to Gaza.
The UN chief's first stop in the territory was at the Amal (Hope) school in Khan Yunis, with a visit to a Japanese-funded housing project also on the agenda.
He is not scheduled to meet with any member of the Islamic Resistanc e Movement, Hamas.

Ban's trip to Gaza comes as part of a visit to the Zionist entity and the Palestinian territories intended to convince the two sides to continue meeting, as the international community seeks a way to kickstart direct negotiations.

He arrived in the region a day after meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Following talks with Netanyahu, Ban condemned rocket attacks from Gaza as "unacceptable" and said he had discussed the delicate informal truce.

He also urged the Zionist entity to offer "goodwill gestures" to the Palestinians to lure them back to talks.

But his call to halt Zionist settlement construction, a key Palestinian demand, appeared to be rebuffed by Netanyahu, who said Wednesday he considered settlements an issue for discussion during negotiations, not before.


Source: Agencies

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Blood is No Game!

2012-02-02T13:06:00.001+04:00

Batoul Wehbe

Pictures taken from Reuters

Port Said Stadium turned to be a scene of a massacre when fans of Al-Masry, a team based in Port Said at the northern end of the Suez Canal, invaded the pitch celebrating the team’s home win over Al-Ahly, the Cairo-based club, because of a “provocative banner” something that was blamed on “foreign hand.”

Players fled to their changing rooms amid an almost total absence of police. There were wildly different estimates of casualties, but doctors said they believed 74 were dead and at least 1,000 people were injured prompting fans and politicians on Thursday to turn on the ruling army for failing to prevent the deadly incident.

Angry politicians denounced the lack of security at the match and blamed military leaders for allowing, or even causing, the tragedy which was believed to be a telling sign of the lack of security in Egypt following last year’s revolution.

Muslim Brotherhood accused an “invisible” foreign hand behind this “unjustified” massacre. “The authorities have been negligent. We fear that some officers are punishing the people for their revolution and for depriving them of their ability to act as tyrants and restricting their privileges,” the group said in a statement.

Ahly players said that police and armed forces were nowhere to be seen during or after the clashes and rumors were that the al-Masry fans were allegedly preventing the ambulances from entering the stadium for an hour and half, as reported by some Egyptian dailies.

“Down with military rule,” thousands of Egyptians chanted at the main Cairo train station where they met injured fans returning from the bloody scene. Hundreds of protesters gathered outside the state television building and marches across the capital were planned.

Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, who is Egypt's military ruler, sent two military planes to Port Said to fly out the players and the injured, state television reported. He stressed that the country's security "is fine" as he waited at an airport in east Cairo to meet the players and wounded fans.

FIFA President Sepp Blatter was “very shocked and saddened to learn that a large number of football supporters have died or been injured” describing it as a black day for football. “Such a catastrophic situation is unimaginable and should not happen,” he said.

Prime Minister Kamal al-Ganzuri was to hold an emergency cabinet meeting on Thursday to discuss the events. Politicians in Cairo expressed fury at the deaths.


Source: Agencies Egypt soccer clash kills 74, ruling military blamed

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

BBC censors ‘Palestine’ from rap

2012-02-02T12:59:00.000+04:00

by Jonathon Blakeley

PRESS RELEASE for immediate release: 31st January 2012: -

The BBC has admitted it was ‘overcautious’ in editing the word ‘Palestine’ from an artist’s performance on Radio 1Xtra and has said it is ‘looking to learn’ from the way it handled the situation.

However, in a ruling released today (31/01/12), the BBC Trust said the final content that was broadcast on the Charlie Sloth Hip Hop M1X – a music programme – was not biased and therefore did not breach its editorial guidelines.

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) has spent eight months trying to find out why the decision was made to censor the lyrics of a freestyle performance by the rapper,. Appearing on the Charlie Sloth show in February 2011, he sang:

I can scream Free Palestine for my beliefs”.

BBC producers replaced the word ‘Palestine’ with the sound of breaking glass, and the censored performance was repeated in April on the same show.
Amena Saleem, of PSC, said:

In its correspondence with us, the BBC said the word Palestine isn’t offensive, but ‘implying that it is not free is the contentious issue”,

and this is why the edit was made.

“Putting aside the BBC’s ignorance of international law, which states unambiguously that Palestine is under occupation, we have argued that this decision clearly shows the BBC’s bias against Palestine. Unable to counter this point, the BBC Trust has moved the goalposts and decided to look at the censored content that was broadcast in February and April 2011.

“And the Trustees have decided that the content from which the word ‘Palestine’ had been edited was not biased against Palestine. This level of manipulation and duplicity would not be out of place in Catch 22.”

Ms Saleem added:

“It’s a great shame that, in the year of the Arab Spring when the BBC was covering the struggle of millions of people for freedom, it remained wedded to its institutionalised bias against the Palestinians and refused to even recognise the fact of their occupation.”

In May 2011, 19 artists, MPs, academics and lawyers signed a letter to the Guardian protesting at the edit as ‘an attack on the principles of free speech’. Signatories included the director Ken Loach, and comedians Mark Thomas, Jeremy Hardy, Mark Steel and Alexei Sayle.

Here is a video that you won’t see or hear on the BBC TV or Radio – Enjoy.
Long Live Palestine by Lowkey.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Patrick Cockburn: Sanctions Can Only Deepen the Iran Crisis

2012-02-02T11:26:00.001+04:00

Via Al-Manar

The Independent

The way in which the growing confrontation with Iran is being sold by the US, Israel and West European leaders is deeply dishonest. The manipulation of the media and public opinion through systematic threat exaggeration is similar to the drum beat of propaganda and disinformation about Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction that preceded the invasion in 2003.

The supposed aim of imposing sanctions on Iran's oil exports and central bank, measures officially joined by the EU, is to force Iran to abandon its nuclear programme before it reaches the point where it could theoretically build a nuclear bomb. Even Israel now agrees that Iran has not yet decided to do so, but the Iranian nuclear programme is still being presented as a danger to Israel and the rest of the world.

There are two other menacing parallels between the run-up to the Iraq war and what is happening now. The purported issue is the future of the Iranian nuclear programme, but, for part of the coalition mustering against Iran, the real purpose is the overthrow of the Iranian government. The origin of the present crisis was the moves last November and December by the neoconservatives in the US, Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party and the Israel lobby in Washington to impose sanctions on Iranian oil exports and Iran's central bank. These are very much the same people who targeted Iraq in the 1990s. They have been able to force the White House to adopt their programme and it is now, in turn, being implemented by a European Union that naively sees sanctions as an alternative to military conflict.

In reality, sanctions are likely to intensify the crisis, impoverish ordinary Iranians and psychologically prepare the ground for war because of the demonisation of Iran. The problem is that Israel and its right-wing American allies are more interested in regime change than Tehran's nuclear programme. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz succinctly stated the differences between the Israeli government and Washington. It said that "while the Americans are actively seeking a way to start a dialogue, Israel is preaching confrontation and the toppling of the government in Tehran".

It is this latter policy that has triumphed. Israel, its congressional allies and the neoconservatives have successfully bamboozled the Obama administration into a set of policies that make sense only if the aim is overthrow of the regime in Tehran. The Iranian government has been given no diplomatic way to climb down without humiliation. Its nuclear programme has been turned into a symbol of resistance to foreign diktats. This makes it impossible for anybody in the fractious Iranian leadership to compromise without being denounced as a traitor by political opponents.

Whatever the intentions of Barack Obama when he was elected, the covert offensive initiated by President Bush against Iran has continued. He signed a secret "presidential finding" in 2008 under which $400m was allocated to fund Iranian government opponents. The US's new allies included unsavoury groups such as the Sunni sectarian killers of Jundullah operating in Iranian Baluchistan. The US may have intended to limit the degree of co-operation but, according to Foreign Policy magazine, Mossad agents simply posed as CIA members in dealing with Jundullah. What was the point of these pinprick attacks? A few bombs in Iranian Baluchistan are not going to pose much of a threat to the Iranian leadership in Tehran. The motive was most probably to provoke the Iranians into retaliation against the US which would bring a US-Iranian military conflict closer.

The same may well be true of the assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists. A little-noticed aspect of these is that the scientists were easy to kill because they were driving themselves around Tehran in their own cars. But any country that has evidence its top scientists are at risk provides them with security. The lack of the simplest security measures argues that these scientists were never at the centre of Iran's nuclear programme. A more likely explanation for the attacks, assuming that Israel was behind them, was to provoke Iran into a retaliation against the US or Israel that would be a casus belli.

It is difficult not to admire the skill with which Mr Netanyahu has manoeuvred the White House and European leaders into the very confrontation with Iran they wanted to avoid. He has been helped by the Iranian President's anti-Semitic outbursts and the apparent fixing of the 2009 presidential election. But Mr Netanyahu's most effective weapon has been the threat that Israel would unilaterally launch air strikes unless the White House did something. This has always been less likely than it looked. Israel has seldom gone to war without a "green light" from the US.

A more rational explanation of Israeli threats to act alone is that they were wholly designed to scare the White House and its European allies. The Israeli Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, made blood-curdling speeches about the imminence of the Iranian threat leaving Israel with no option but to launch a pre-emptive strike (until he quite recently said the opposite). The former head of Mossad gave credibility to unilateral Israeli action by warning that it would be a self-inflicted disaster for his country.

These manoeuvres succeeded. Serious sanctions are being imposed. Iran will have difficulty selling its oil. Its status as a regional power in the Middle East is weakening as the long-term survival of Bashar al-Assad, its most important ally, looks dubious.

Here again there is an uncomfortable parallel with Iraq. Sanctions against Iraq from 1990 to 2003 impoverished Iraqis and criminalised much of its administration. Unicef said half a million children died because of sanctions. To the White House and European leaders, sanctions may appear preferable to armed conflict. Unfortunately, history shows that long embargoes kill more people than brief wars.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Militias battle it out in Libyan capital

2012-02-02T11:20:00.000+04:00

In case you missed it: Will 2012 Bring Tribal War to Libya?
In case you missed it: Gordon Duff Calling for unity??? What Time is It?
In case you missed it: On Sabir Nureddin's alternative strategy for liberation of Libya

Militias battle it out in Libyan capital

Published Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Rival militias engaged in a gun battle near office buildings and a five-star hotel in the center of the Libyan capital on Wednesday, underscoring how volatile the country still is three months on from Muammar Gaddafi's death.

A Reuters reporter said exchanges of both heavy and light weapons could be heard coming from the Tripoli district of El-Saadi beach, a stretch of Mediterranean coast overlooked by office skyscrapers and the Marriott Hotel.

Ambulance sirens could be heard and plumes of smoke rose from the area of the fighting, which had continued for at least 40 minutes.

Interior ministry forces had blocked a one kilometer section of road alongside the beach, but they did not appear to be intervening. Two militia pick-up trucks, with anti-aircraft guns on the back, were seen driving past towards the fighting.

An interior ministry official said the fighting was between militiamen from the city of Misrata, and units from Zintan. Both groups fought to oust Gaddafi and now are using their military power to underwrite a campaign for influence in the new Libya.

"There are two groups fighting," said the official, Naji Awad, who was monitoring the battle from near the Marriott Hotel. "Misrata controls a police academy building up the road and they are fighting with Zintan. We do not know why they are fighting," he said.

Libya's ruling National Transitional Council (NTC) is struggling to impose its authority on the country and form a functioning national police force and army.

Western intervention into the Libyan uprising last year brought with it an influx of weapons, many of which are now in the hands of rogue militias unwilling to relinquish their new found power.
Heavily-armed militias have carved the country into local fiefdoms and their fighters, though they express loyalty to the NTC, answer only to their own commanders.

Several militias from outside the capital have set up bases in Tripoli. They clash with each other intermittently often because of disputes over who controls which neighborhoods of the city.
The violence on Wednesday was the first time in weeks that a major gun battle had broken out in the center of the capital.

(Reuters, Al-Akhbar)

Blame NATO for the Mess in Libya
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

UN Session on Syria: Assad to Hand Over Power to Deputy

2012-02-02T09:30:00.000+04:00

Local Editor

The UN Security Council held a meeting Tuesday night for discussing the Syrian crisis and a Western-Arab resolution draft that demands Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to hand over power to his deputy.
Qatari Foreign Minister Hamad Bin Jassem Al-Thani considered in a statement in the opening of the session that the Syrian government did not correspond with major terms of the observers' protocol, saying that “the Syrian government did not make any sincere efforts to cooperate with us. Its only solution was to kill its own people.”

From here, Al-Thani called upon the International community to impose economic pressure on Syria.

In parallel, the Arab League Secretary General Nabil Al-Arab urged the Security Council to take quick and decisive measures, indicating that the priority was for a cease-fire between all parts, and for supporting an Arab work plan to reach a peaceful solution for the crisis.

Al-Arabi stressed that the Arab League was concerned to reach an Arab solution without any foreign military intervention, adding: “don’t abandon the Syrian people. What is required is to issue a clear decision that supports the Arab efforts.”

For his part, the Syrian Permanent Representative to the UN Bashar Al-Ja’afari responded to the Arab League statements by reminding of the Syrian people’s support to the Gulf States during the 1960s in their struggle against the British colonialism.

He said that “Syrian nationalism rejects foreign intervention and emphasizes that Syria’s sovereignty, independence, and unity of land are a red line. It also assured that it stands one row against incitements, division and violence.”

Al-Ja’afari further called for dialogue stating that “we as Syrians have ahead of us the opportunity to have true national dialogue and speed up reforms with the aim of establishing real national partnership that preserves the security of the homeland and citizens. This is the only way to come out of this crisis and fulfill the legitimate demands of the Syrian people without compromising our homeland."
“The coming generations will hold accountable all those who missed this opportunity,” he added.

Moreover, the Syrian representative to the UN assured that “Syria rejects any decision outside the Arab work plan which it previously approved, and considers that the Arab League’s latest decision is a violation to its national sovereignty, a clear intervention in its internal affairs, and a breach to section eight in the Arab League charter.”

Al-Ja’afari pointed out that Syria signed the protocol to commit to an Arab solution. He warned that the country will firmly confront its enemies, accusing the Arab League of meeting with foreign plots that aim at destroying Syria.
US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton said that if the Security Council did not take action to solve the crisis in Syria, it would lose its credibility, indicating that “despite his (Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad) merciless policies, the Syrian people will be able to determine their destiny.”

Similarly, the French and British foreign ministers expressed their support to the decision, while the Russian representative to the UN Vitaly Churkin stressed that “the solution does not come from outside Syria” adding that “we are certain that the International Community should not inflame the crisis through sanctions and military intervention.”

The Chinese representative also said that “we believe that Syria and its people could solve the crisis,” indicating that sanctions were not the solution.

The UN decision on Syria included an instant stop of violence and demanded President Al-Assad to delegate his full authority to his deputy and then to form a national unity government leading to transparent and free elections under Arab and international supervision.
The decision stated that there will be no military intervention in Syria.

Ayatollah Khamenei Censures US Interference in Syria

Security Council towards New Historic Juncture through the Syrian Gate

President al-Assad Visits a Number of Army and Security Wounded Members, Assures Their Health Conditions

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Palestinians need high calibre leaders

2012-02-02T07:29:00.000+04:00

by Stuart Littlewood

William Hague & Mahmoud Abbas

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas was in London recently. Did anyone know? Did Western media care? No. Not until reports appeared that Jewish community leaders cancelled a meeting with him after intervention by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s Office and Israel’s embassy in London, and Palestinian legislator Hanan Ashrawi condemned the move as

“seeking to suppress and manipulate Jewish public opinion”.

It was also typical of Netanyahu’s “persistent efforts” to prevent dialogue, she said, according to the Palestinian Ma’an news agency. Even then, Western media were not much interested.

The Palestinian London embassy’s smart new website carries … nothing journalists can get their teeth into. It doesn’t introduce us to Palestinian chiefs and their ‘team’. It offers no strategic briefing material on current events. And, crucially, there is no attempt to set the news agenda.

I put it to the Palestinian ambassador in London, Professor Manuel Hassassian, that such a blunder by Israel was a gift to any alert Public Relations/Public Affairs team. Why didn’t the Palestinian Authority seize it?

Hassassian denied the Palestinians asked to meet with the Jewish community. It seems odd that Ashrawi, a shrewd, well respected politician and close colleague of Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, could have got it wrong. Or indeed the normally reliable Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which reported that Hassassian himself, together with British diplomats, had pushed for Jewish leaders to meet with Abbas.

Confused? Me too. Whatever the truth, the Palestinian administration is in the habit of missing open goals. It has dumbed right down. The London embassy’s smart new website carries a selection of items from news agencies but nothing journalists can get their teeth into. It doesn’t introduce us to Palestinian chiefs and their “team”. It offers no strategic briefing material on current events. And, crucially, there is no attempt to set the news agenda.

Information the embassy sends direct to people like me is mostly notification of social events and similar “froth”. After all these years, and with momentous opportunities and threats looming, Ramallah still fails to give a good account of itself. Is that by accident or design? If it was never Abbas’s intention to meet Jewish community leaders, what exactly did he come to the UK for?

What passes for “success”

The embassy says his “successful visit” included meetings with Prime Minister David Cameron, Foreign Secretary William Hague and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. President Abbas also met opposition leader Ed Miliband and other parliamentarians. In addition, he met the archbishop of Canterbury and other church leaders to brief them on the ongoing violations of places of worship and the Judaization taking place in East Jerusalem.
Cameron told him:

Obviously, as a friend of Israel and a friend of the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people, we want to see a strong, democratic, peaceful Israel alongside a strong, democratic and peaceful Palestine. We believe that is achievable, but we can’t achieve it without the two parties coming together and talking and discussing. In the end, this two-state solution can only come about from the two parties talking to each other. We cannot want it more than you want it.
So, we wish you well … and we say that as a friend of Israel but also a very strong friend of the Palestinian people…

To which I understand Abbas replied:

Of course, nothing can be achieved without negotiations … we hope that there will be something tangible as a result of these negotiations.
“Of course, time is of the essence; there must be speed, we must be fast in achieving those things because the settlements and the whole thing will go on – seeing the settlements going on, is going to help everything; it’s what stands in the face of everything at the same time. So, settlements have to stop. Settlements have to stop in order for us to be able to continue our negotiations; to come to some sort of solution and a solution which will encompass the vision of the Palestinian state to come in the future.
I personally know very well that you have a very balanced relationship, be that towards Israel or the Palestinian Authority. This at the same time is of great importance because you could play a political role, so to speak, so that we can find the balance that we all want to seek. We always need your help, sir.

Good grief, is that the best Ramallah’s speech-writers can do? And what was that about Britain’s Israel-firster government having “a very balanced relationship”…?
“Where was Abbas’s concern for Gaza, or isn’t Gaza part of Palestine any more? Doesn’t the blockade of Gaza have to end before Palestinians even think about getting once again embroiled in futile negotiations?”

Where was Abbas’s concern for Gaza, or isn’t Gaza part of Palestine any more? Doesn’t the blockade of Gaza have to end before Palestinians even think about getting once again embroiled in futile negotiations?

The idea, voiced by Zionist Cameron and repeated by Abbas, that nothing can be achieved without negotiation is of course utterly false. There’s no mention – on either side – of international law enforcement and the essential role it must play before any negotiations can be considered fair or honourable.

Hague said after his meeting with Abbas:

“I stressed the importance Britain attaches to a secure and universally recognized Israel living alongside a sovereign and viable Palestinian state, based on the borders of 1967, with Jerusalem the future capital of both states, and a fair settlement for refugees.”

Only weeks earlier Hague, a fanatical Israel flag-waver, was preparing to betray the Palestinians by abstaining if their quest for statehood was pushed to a vote at the UN.
More pretty words devoid of meaning were paraded in the archbishop of Canterbury’s press release:

We continue to share the hopes of the Palestinian leadership for a lasting and just peace in the Holy Land, and we pray for the courage on all sides to break the current deadlock. Young people in Israel and in the Palestinian territories long for justice and stability and they must not be let down. We were deeply grateful to President Abbas for taking time to share with us his concerns and aspirations.

The only genuine boost he received was a remark by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, referring to Israel’s illegal settlements:

Once you place physical facts on the ground which make it impossible to deliver what everyone has for years agreed is the ultimate destination, then you do immense damage.
It’s an act of deliberate vandalism to the basic premise upon which negotiations have taken place for years and that is why we have expressed our concerns as a government in increasingly forceful terms.

He prefaced his comments by saying there was

“no stronger supporter of Israel than myself as a beacon of democracy in the region”

. It’s a sad reflection on the Westminster scene when Clegg, a Liberal Democrat and supposedly possessed of certain principles, feels obliged to say such a silly thing when it’s tantamount to defending the indefensible.

“This dreary ‘grey suit’ of a man might have done better to just meet ordinary people – people like the 40,000 or so displaced Palestinians living in the UK and longing to return, and the numerous activist organizations that devote much time and energy putting across the Palestinian case…”

Didn’t Abbas remind him about Israel’s abduction and imprisonment without trial of the 26 elected members of the Palestinian Legislative Council, including its head, Dr Aziz Dweik? Dweik is reported to have been arrested by Israel three times since 2002 and twice held without formal charges. This wholesale kidnapping of democratically elected officials underlines yet again Israel’s disregard for international law and the absurdity of its claim to be the only beacon of democracy in the Middle East.
So, does Abbas seriously believe his visit was “successful”? This dreary “grey suit” of a man might have done better to just meet ordinary people – people like the 40,000 or so displaced Palestinians living in the UK and longing to return, and the numerous activist organizations that devote much time and energy putting across the Palestinian case, slapping down Israel’s propaganda lies and generally doing the job that Abbas and his lacklustre Fatah outfit have failed to do.
That’s if he wanted their ongoing support. Maybe he’s not bothered.

Under orders not to rock the Israeli boat?

Some time ago Hamas complained that the Palestinian Authority was not getting its message across thanks to “poorly qualified or unqualified spokespersons with inadequate political and linguistic abilities”. Diplomacy had failed and Palestinians needed “professional spokespersons with excellent knowledge of the world and mastery of foreign languages, especially English, to tell the world in a straightforward manner that Israel is a murderer, liar and land thief…”

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, who ran rings round the Palestinians while ambassador in London, recently addressed the Security Council on the situation in the Middle East. He said:

And how many times have members of this Council – and many others – repeated: “settlements are the primary obstacle to peace”?… The primary obstacle to peace is not settlements. The primary obstacle to peace is the so-called “claim of return”. Let me repeat that: the major hurdle to peace is the Palestinians’ insistence on the so-called “claim of return” [he means the “right of return”].

Any press team worth its salt could make mincemeat of Prosor. A competent Palestinian administration would have had a news release in every activist’s inbox and on every mainstream editor’s desk within hours and made spokespersons (speaking perfect English) available to follow through with additional briefings and further comment. It would have gone worldwide via all embassies and missions. But Prosor broadcasts his toxic nonsense non-stop, knowing there will be no effective rebuke from the Palestinians.

It is six years since the Palestinian Authority/Palestine Liberation Organization was urged to have all their key people professionally trained in media skills. They haven’t done so. Consequently, for the last six critical years the Palestinian people have continued to lose ground.

“Will the Palestinians ever seize the opportunity and gear up properly for the communications struggle to win justice? If it’s left to the likes of Abbas the answer is no and the outcome will be disastrous.”
The Palestinian high command behaves as if under strict orders not to rock the boat and not to make waves or even the slightest ripple. They continue to squander their chances and make little impact, even though truth and justice are on their side. So Israel has been the undeserving winner in the propaganda war.

Will the Palestinians ever seize the opportunity and gear up properly for the communications struggle to win justice? If it’s left to the likes of Abbas the answer is no and the outcome will be disastrous.
As campaigner Robert Stiver commented a few days ago, we need

“ideas and commitments on how we can finally get serious, via a mass uprising, to ‘out’ Zionism beyond the choir and bring an end to the Palestinians’ unbearable torment”.

But hopes of mobilizing the necessary numbers are thwarted by the continuing presence of Mahmoud Abbas. His presidential term ran out long ago and he’s clinging to power unlawfully. He needs to step down or be removed. Someone with unquestionable legitimacy and true leadership qualities must fill the void and deploy skilled resources.

On Abbas’s watch disunity has triumphed. He rides roughshod over the Basic Law and has a crime sheet as long as your arm. He’ll be remembered mostly for doing the Israeli occupation forces’ dirty work.

Another problem is chief negotiator Saeb Erekat who has occupied that vitally important position for nearly 20 years and achieved – well, what? He must be the most unsuccessful negotiator on the planet. Why is he still there?

If Palestinians are to retain worldwide sympathy and support, build additional strength and galvanize the whole movement into action against the corrupt political class, they will have to find leaders of a much higher calibre – and fast.
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Waterfront, luxury residential development, a Libyan-Qatari Joint Venture

2012-02-02T07:14:00.000+04:00

Posted on February 2, 2012 |

From “The Tripoli Post”:

- “The Waterfront to Include 5-Star Resort, Residences, Shops, and More.
Work has begun at The Waterfront, a luxury residential and resort development located near Tripoli along Libya’s Mediterranean coast, announced Al-Libya Al-Qataria (ALAQ), a joint venture between Oyia (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Libya’s Economic and Social Development Fund) and Qatari Diar Real Estate Investment Company (a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Qatar Investment Authority)”……

…… Eng. Mohammed bin Ali Al-Hedfa, Group CEO of Qatari Diar, added, “We are delighted to be breaking ground on The Waterfront, and we consider it an important symbol of the deep friendship between Libya and the State of Qatar. Furthermore, we believe that The Waterfront’s world-class resort and residences have the potential to herald a new era of luxury living for both Libyan residents and the growing number of business and leisure travelers who visit Tripoli”.
Numerous international consultants are providing assistance to the project. The initial phase of The Waterfront is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2012″……….

……….read the full article at the page:

http://www.tripolipost.com/articledetail.asp?c=11&i=5107

*
*
*

Eng. Mohammed bin Ali Al-Hedfa, Group CEO of Qatari Diar, added, “We are delighted to be breaking ground on The Waterfront, and we consider it an important symbol of the deep friendship between Libya and the State of Qatar. Furthermore, we believe that The Waterfront’s world-class resort and residences have the potential to herald a new era of luxury living for both Libyan residents and the growing number of business and leisure travelers who visit Tripoli.”
Numerous international consultants are providing assistance to the project. The initial phase of The Waterfront is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2012.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

BBC censors own report on Tunisia’s Jews

2012-02-02T00:35:00.000+04:00

by Alan Hart

There was a moment in a report from Tunisia by the BBC’s Wyre Davies when I could not stop myself laughing. I was listening to it on the Corporation’s generally excellent World Service radio. (In my view this particular BBC service is generally excellent because unlike all other BBC news and current affairs outlets, radio and tv, it often reflects some of the truth about what is happening in and over Palestine that became Israel).

Davies was in Tunisia to find out how its remaining 2,000 Jews (down from 300,000 once upon a time) were responding to a call from an Israeli government minister for them to move to Israel. The case the minister made was, apparently, that their security and wellbeing were no longer guaranteed in an Arab country with an Islamist government in place of what Davies called a

sectarian dictatorship”.

In other words, Tunisia’s Jews were in danger and would be safe in Israel. (My guess is that the greatest concern of the Israeli minister and his colleagues was less the fate of Jews in Tunisia and more the need for Jews from anywhere to go to Israel to help defuse the ticking demographic time-bomb of occupation).
The story as told by Davies for the BBC’s World (radio) Service was honest reporting at its best. Its explicit message was that Tunisia’s Jews have rejected the Israeli call.
One of those interviewed by Davies said to him and a listening world, “No one here is afraid.”
Another said,

Go to Israel?… I’m not crazy!”

That’s what made me laugh.
A subsequent development wiped the smile from my face.
A friend in Italy sent me a web link for the television version of the Davies report from Tunisia. I opened the link to check that it was the same report I’d heard on the World (radio) Service. It started in exactly the same way so I assumed it was, and I tweeted it as “MUST WATCH: Tunisia’s Jews reject (Israel’s) call to leave,”
An hour or so later I made the time to view the complete television version. The Jewish gentleman who said, “Go to Israel…? I’m not crazy!” had been edited out.
On past BBC form there are four possible explanations.

Driven by a personal commitment to Zionism and support for its monster child right or wrong, a senior BBC executive ordered the quote to be dropped on his own initiative,
A senior BBC executive received a telephone call from the Israeli Embassy in London, or possibly the prime minister’s office in Jerusalem, telling him or her that Israel would not be pleased if the BBC gave more air time to a Tunisian Jew who was saying “No” to Israel in a way that suggested he had some contempt for the Zionist state and thought that many Israelis were crazy.
A senior BBC executive anticipated that giving the Jewish gentleman in Tunisia a wider audience would provoke Zionism’s wrath and decided (as BBC excutives often do) that it was better for the Corporation to censor itself than provoke that wrath.
For reasons of limited space in a television news bulletin, the report for the World (radio) Service had to be edited, shortened.

I have to say that I consider the fourth possible explanation as summarized above to be the least likely one. Why? There are many very good journalists in the BBC and they know as well as I do that the single most revealing and therefore newsworthy statement in the original Davies report was that of the Jewish gentleman who said, “Go to Israel…? I’m not crazy!”

The censored (or edited) version of the Davies report can be found at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/news/world-africa-16805329
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Receiving Islamic Jihad SG, Imam Khamenei Stresses Tehran’s Strong Opposition to Foreign Interference in Syria

2012-02-02T00:30:00.001+04:00

Local Editor
Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Imam Sayyed Ali Khamenei confirmed Tuesday that "Syria's support for the resistance movements in the region is the main reason behind US hostile policies against the county."

Receiving the Secretary-General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad movement Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, His Eminence voiced "Tehran's strong opposition to foreign interference in Syria."

"Iran's stance on Syria is support for any reforms in favor of people and opposition to US and its allies' interference in Syria's domestic affairs," Ayatollah Khamenei.

Haneyya discusses Palestinian
developments with Amir of Qatar

His Eminence further explained that "if one considers the developments in Syria with a comprehensive analysis, the US project in that country can be easily seen."

"Unfortunately, some other countries and some regional countries are participating in the American plot," Imam Khamenei said.

Mishaal meeting with Jordanian
monarch turned new page

The Leader underlined that the main goal of the US in Syria is to strike the resistance line in the region "because Syria supports Palestinian resistance and Islamic resistance in Lebanon."

“If the Syrian government promises the US that it stops its support for Islamic resistance in Palestine and Lebanon, then all problems will be solved because Syria's only crime is supporting the resistance,” the Leader added. “US and certain western countries want to revenge their recent defeats in the region, including in Egypt and Tunisia,” Ayatollah Khamenei underscored.

Source: News agencies, Edited by moqawama.org

The enemy is this American Administration and its “tool” not “ally”in the region, Israel,
Ayatollah Taskhiri: US, “Israel” Seek Control of Region, Syria to Target Resistance

Syrian Paper ... Blown Away By Hard Choice?!

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Inoculating Israel? Some Uncomfortable Doubts about BDS

2012-02-02T00:05:00.000+04:00

by Francis Clark-Lowes

When I shop at my local Sainsbury’s I check the usual suspects to see if they are produced in Israel, and if so I don’t buy them. I refuse to treat Israel as if it were a normal state, and this is my little gesture to say so.

But if I’m given a Marks and Spencer’s gift voucher for Christmas, or if I urgently need some coleslaw and can only find it at our local after-hours M&S, I don’t tear up the voucher or forego coleslaw with my baked potato. And when I arrived at Sainsbury’s the other day to find the air resounding with amplified cries of ‘West Bank’, ‘Gaza’, ‘Jordan valley’, ‘Palestinians’, ‘Israeli settlers’ I scurried into an out-of-sight aisle.

Why this lack of moral fibre? Is it that I no longer have the undoubted courage it takes to engage in such actions? Do I feel guilty at abandoning my one-time comrades (which I had done some time before my expulsion)? Perhaps a bit of both. But I’m afraid it’s more that I no longer feel confident, at a gut level, about BDS.

I ask myself: What is BDS, at best, likely to achieve? Without the support of the international community, I can’t see it bringing Israel to its knees. The US is committed to Israel’s survival. But what, then, of the moral effect of significant pressure? Won’t this bring about a touchier-feelier Israel, or Israel-Palestine, one which respects universal rights?

Those who argue for such an effect seem to fall into three camps; two-staters, one-staters and vague humanitarians. The two-state solution is dead, and would in any case almost certainly have required the Palestinians to accept a severe curtailing of their rights vis-à-vis Israel. On the other hand, the one-state solution, if it granted Palestinians equal rights, would involve the end of Zionism. Let’s think about that a little.

Without the end of Zionism the oppression of the Palestinians will continue. Those who favour BDS argue that there is a parallel between Apartheid South Africa and Israel. They say the equivalent of BDS in the anti-Apartheid movement played an important part in overthrowing that regime.

I have two reservations about this theory. The first is that there was very little ideological support for Apartheid beyond South Africa, while there is massive ideological support for Zionism. The second is that the demise of Apartheid came immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. It is not difficult to see how the two were connected. In other words, Apartheid was more vulnerable than Zionism, and even then it was a global shift in power which really brought about the change.

But to return to the vague humanitarians, they don’t think, they just feel that if we believe firmly enough in BDS there will somehow be a just outcome, even if we can’t conceive at present what that might be. They are inclined to say: ‘Israel is there. You can’t change facts.’ Well, the British Empire, Apartheid South Africa and the Soviet Union were there, and now they are no more. The question is how such a change might be achieved in Israel-Palestine? I’m doubtful that BDS is the answer.

The main attraction of BDS, it seems to me, is that it offers the possibility of almost unlimited activity in a campaigning situation which is otherwise almost totally stalemated. It feels good to be doing something, and the less we think about it the better. I have already stated how I believe that stalemate could be broken, so I won’t restate my position here.

If I am right in doubting the effectiveness of BDS, is it possible that it could actually be counter-productive? For example, while it’s reasonable for an oppressed people to say that they are prepared to suffer further for the sake of a campaign which will eventually liberate them, if that campaign is a forlorn hope, will they simply suffer further (e.g. from lack of employment) in vain?

And then there is the question of targeting companies which in some way support Israel. Our entire political, economic and cultural system is complicit in Israeli crimes. Is it then wise to target particular firms like Marks and Spencer’s, thereby implying that complicity is limited?

And lastly there is a really uncomfortable thought. Could it be that the pin-pricks of BDS inoculate Israel against further effective action, by strengthening its resolve and resources, rather than delivering a lethal injection?
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Blame NATO for the Mess in Libya

2012-02-01T23:04:00.000+04:00

Situation in Libya is promising a multi-layered conflict. (Onislam)

By Ramzy Baroud

The British Foreign Office and the US State Department are seriously concerned. Human rights officers in the United Nations are angry. Canada, for some reason, seems particularly enraged. The target of all this fury is Libya's National Transitional Council (NTC), which is berated for failing to curtail widespread human rights violations throughout the country.

The story sounds somewhat typical. Rights watchdog groups sound the alarm regarding violations in some third world country. Western powers respond by demanding accountability. The media reports on the story until it eventually fades away.

However, this story requires more than a mere acknowledgement of the self-serving approach to human rights violations. The accusers include the UN and leading members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato). It was the selective wording and interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 that led to a devastating war against Libya. The war destroyed one brutal regime and replaced it with another — at the expense of tens of thousands of Libyan lives.

As for the accused, it is no other than the NTC, which itself was a Nato political construct aimed at leading the political transition in Libya to serve western interests.

The whole Libyan affair was choreographed in a way that actually resembles the management of Iraq following the March 2003 invasion. Western powers purported to serve as the enforcers of international law, with the altruistic aim of ridding the world of vile dictators who ‘kill their own people'. But the situation in Libya is apparently less manageable than anticipated.

Iraq Misadventure

It turned out that ‘mission accomplished' in Libya was yet another hoax. The result is no less devastating than what transpired in Iraq.

The current situation in Libya is promising a multi-layered conflict involving numerous militias, tribes and factions, all organised around ideological, familial and political objectives that are unique to Libya itself.

The war on Libya has empowered some parties and given them the chance to settle scores. This is highlighted in the current violence in Bani Walid, which saw widespread killings and tortures of those accused of being loyalists of Muammar Gaddafi.

All it takes for one militia to justify its onslaught against any town in Libya is to declare that it hosts Gaddafi loyalists. This was the case in Bani Walid, one of the last cities to surrender. The denunciation is enough to render every act of aggression and torture somehow acceptable by Arab and western media alike. The NTC is merely choosing sides to ensure that emerging powerful militias remain loyal to it, even if only verbally.

All of this goes against Nato's initial calculations. Nato had hoped that a strong NTC, backed by well-controlled militias, would eventually merge to become the country's next government and national army. This didn't happen. The NTC was organised haphazardly without a real popular mandate, while the militias are still in their trenches to ensure that future Libya will not be dismissive of their tribes, cities and factional interests. It is a recipe for a civil war.

The situation worsened as rights groups issued stinging criticism of the dire situation in Libyan prisons. Amnesty International spoke of inmates dying under torture. In Davos, The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, told Associated Press that various militias hold up to 8,000 prisoners in 60 detention centres around the country. In these centres, "there's torture, extrajudicial executions, rape of both men and women".

The Nato allies are concerned, of course. If the Libyan model — regime change from the air — completely fails, their military adventurism in the Middle East will suffer yet another setback. More, the unfolding of the Libyan travesty will continue to reawaken allegations of serious war crimes committed by Nato itself, who supposedly unleashed the war on Libya "to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack".

The Nato war on Libya was commanded by a Canadian, Lt Gen Charles Bouchard. Last June, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird was quoted as saying that Libya should not be expected to go from "Gaddafi to Thomas Jefferson". He failed to elaborate on what kind of democracy Nato intended to achieve with its 9,600-strikes mission.

To berate Libyans for failing to adhere to human rights is brazen hypocrisy, especially as many of Nato victims are still not fully counted for. The behaviour of militias, and the unrepresentative NTC are simply a continuation of the very violent legacy set forth by the very Nato countries that are demanding accountability, democracy and the rule of law.

- Ramzy Baroud is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story. (This article was originally published in Gulf News, February 1, 2012)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

What makes the holocaust so important?

2012-02-01T22:55:00.000+04:00

by Paul Barrow

Following weeks of harasment by Zionist infiltrators Tony Greenstein and Abraham Weizfeld; Paul Barrow, an American solidarity activist told the two tribal activists what he thought of them both. ~ the Editors…

I wouldn’t be so generous as to call you or Weizfeld an “anti-Zionist Jew,” Tony (Greenstein). You look pretty Zionist to me. Zionism is not just the affirmation of the right of a Jewish claim to a bunker along the shores of the Mediterranean. It is this belief in something universally sacrosanct about Jewishness, despite lack of any evidence that there is anything universal about Jews, other than a claim to being “Jewish” that we are not allowed to criticize, regardless of how ugly “Jews” become as a political force in asserting their control over the universe in the name of their tribe. I’m not even sure of your qualifications as a Jew. No one has asked me what my preferences are as to a claim of any sort of identity, and perhaps you should establish your credentials for being a Jew in the first place, since you are so earnest in your desire to defend their honor, whatever they might have left of it after you have done with the subject. Whether one believes in the holocaust or not was not a qualification for being invited to this group any more than whether or not I believe that the Mongols invaded Finland and raped all the wives and brought about the dilution of the Finnish race. Since when is the Jewish tragedy any more important than the Finnish tragedy? No one has asked me if I acknowledge that Kashmir is an integral part of India. Is this also a demand? To question this is also a crime in India. Should I also recognize that 2 million Indians were wiped off the face of the earth by the invasion of Europeans in America? Why isn’t that on the table as well? Why isn’t every genocide in history on the table? Am I also required to admit that the Turks are guilty of Armenian genocide without question, without investigation, without any query at all?

What makes the holocaust so damned important?

Why is holocaust denial now more important to so-called Jews than acknowledging a Jewish god? What does being Jewish mean to you? To admit that there was a holocaust? Are you semitic? Who are the semites? Are you Judaic? Do you believe in the Exodus, the invasion of Palestine, the massacre of the people of Palestine, and the right of return to massacre them AGAIN? Can a white whose origins can only be traced back to the Kazars be considered semitic?

Apocalypse in Gaza

A far greater crime than being a holocaust denier is to be a Palestinian genocide denier, a Palestinian genocide ignorer, of which Jews as a lot are guilty of. There is no massive outcry. You see far more wealthy Jews funding AIPAC than funding the Palestinian cause, and funding other criminal agencies that have fundamentally taken over the American government and made us all, Jews and non Jews alike, a party to perhaps the greatest tragedy ever recorded in history of massive slaughter of Arabs and Muslims across the globe. Refusing to stand up against the crimes of Israel makes every jew complicit, because this is being done in the name of Jews. Yet I have been personally physically threatened by Jews in my own community for asking them to do this. If someone robs a bank and kills all the bank employees and says, I’m doing this for the Barrow family, are not the police going to come to me and ask me if I know anything about this, and am I reponsible for this? What am I to say?

“Shut up. Get off my porch. Get out of my face. You don’t have any right to interrogate me.”

Don’t I have an obligation to deny any role or responsibility for it? If I am silent, doesn’t that make me inherently complicit? Doesn’t at least the appearance of that seem rather suspicious? So why shouldn’t the entire world be looking at the jews and saying, “Hello. What’s up, folks?” Perhaps we should now be calling Jews Holos instead. Have you also established the synagogue of the Holos? Would that be preferable to you? Suppose I deny that there was ever an Exodus? Isn’t that far more fundamental to Jews than Auschwitz? I never heard anyone calling another an “Exodus denier.” Supposing I say that the story of Moses was stolen from the Assyrians. I’ve never heard of anyone accusing another of being a Moses denier. Supposing I say that the story of the flood was stolen from the Sumerian Gilgamesh epic? What does that make me then? A Hebrew denier? Supposing I say that Cain must have scr3wed his mother Eve or that he was a sister f**ker of some future sister because there was no one else to screw to create a global population? Are we all criminals when we say that the Hebrews were notorious liars?

Despite your protestations about ‘Atzmonites’, I notice in your blog that Atzmon is one of your favorite pasttimes, perhaps even far and above your supposed concern for the Palestinians. You have become his publicist, fundamentally. It would be interesting to me to know if there is any other person in this group who has ever written a single word about Gilad Atzmon. I’m sure he appreciates your notice, because it will certainly add much to his take at the cash register in the sale of his latest book. If he is a holocaust denier, I have yet to see any evidence of it. Certainly not from you. I have seen evidence that he asserts the right to question it, as every generation should any other aspect of historical information. Can you go beyond that? To deny something is to say that it never happened or does not exist.

I have read The Wandering Who?, perhaps Atzon’s strongest polemic on Jewish identity, and did not find a single instance of such a statement. I’ll admit that you’re an expert at reducing a fine activist mission to absolute rubbish and have a few skills in the use of epithet and meaningless distractions, however irrelevant and unsubstantiated they may be, but I have yet to see any substance to your babble. You’re nothing but a troll, Tony. You and Weizfeld both. You insist upon changing the subject and making Jewish honor more important than the Palestinian cause, which, at this point, is perhaps the most inane thing I have ever contemplated, given what 6 million Jews are now doing in that part of the globe.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Haneyya, Qassam insist on retaining Mishaal as Hamas leader

2012-02-01T22:38:00.000+04:00

[ 01/02/2012 - 04:12 PM ]

DOHA, (PIC)-- Palestinian premier Ismail Haneyya has renewed Hamas’s insistence on retaining Khaled Mishaal as supreme leader of the movement.

Haneyya told London-based Al-Hayat newspaper in an interview published on Wednesday that Hamas maintains a balanced relations with each of Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries.

He said that the Palestine cause was in big trouble and needed support from all Arab and Islamic countries.

Asked whether Hamas was planning to move from Syria to Qatar or to any other country, Haneyya said that nothing was being discussed within Hamas institutions on this issue.

The Palestinian premier, who arrived in Doha on Monday evening, discussed with the Amir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al-Thani, on Tuesday Palestinian developments especially the national reconciliation and Judaization threats in occupied Jerusalem in addition to the Arab spring.

Meanwhile, Quds Press quoted unidentified sources as saying that a senior delegation of the Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, has asked Mishaal to reverse his decision not to nominate himself for chairmanship of the political bureau.

They said that Mishaal met with the delegation led by commander Ahmed Al-Ja’bari last month and that the delegates refused his decision.

Jihad prisoners go on hunger strike in solidarity with Adnan
	Islamic Jihad prisoners in Megiddo jail have vowed to continue in their hunger strike, which they started a week ago, in solidarity with Jihad leader Sheikh Khader Adnan.

Hundreds of Jewish settlers storm Nablus village
	Hundreds of Jewish settlers stormed the southern Nablus village of Awarta before midnight Tuesday and remained there until dawn Wednesday to tour a number of historical sites

Refugees intend to take up UNRWA schools to pressure it to rebuild their homes
	Angry Palestinian citizens threatened to occupy the UNRWA schools in the Gaza Strip if this UN organization failed to reconstruct their homes it had demolished eight years ago.

Israeli commander bans Jerusalemite activist from entering West Bank
	Avi Mizrahi, the Israeli military commander of the central region, has issued an order banning the Jerusalemite human rights activist Rasim Obaidat from entering the West Bank for six months

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Radwan Ziadeh fails to convince the Kremlin!

2012-02-01T22:29:00.000+04:00

Via FLC

"MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia signaled on Wednesday it would veto a draft U.N. resolution calling on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to step down unless it explicitly ruled out military intervention...

Arab and Western states urged the U.N. Security Council on Tuesday to act swiftly ...But Moscow's envoy to the European Union, Vladimir Chizhov, said there was no chance the Western-Arab draft text could be accepted ... The draft "is missing the most important thing: a clear clause ruling out the possibility that the resolution could be used to justify military intervention in Syrian affairs from outside. For this reason I see no chance this draft could be adopted," Chizhov said....
British Foreign Secretary William Hague said the resolution could not be used to authorize military intervention and his French counterpart Alain Juppe said such an idea was a myth.
But Chizhov's remarks suggested Moscow, would not accept such assurances....
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, who has led the Arab League's efforts to tackle the Syrian crisis, attempted to allay Moscow and Beijing's objections,... (while the lackey on bank roll)Arab League Secretary-General Nabil Elaraby called on the U.N. Security Council to take "rapid and decisive action" by approving the resolution....
"China is firmly opposed to the use of force to solve the Syrian problem and resolutely opposes pushing for forced regime change in Syria, as it violates the United Nations Charter and the basic norms guiding the practice of international relations," Xinhua news agency quoted Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations Li Baodong as telling the Security Council..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 9:18 AM

Russia to Veto Any Unacceptable Syria Resolution in Coming Days

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

America's War Kills over A Million Iraqis

2012-02-01T22:21:00.000+04:00

By Danny Lucia

'Over a million Iraqis are dead from America's war.' That sentence is a cognitive litmus test. Some people's immediate reaction is, 'That can't be right,' because the United States couldn't do that. Or because crimes on that scale don't still happen. Or because they do happen, but only in horrible places that the United States hasn't rescued.

One million is a "Grandpa, what did you do to stop it?" number. It's a number that undeniably puts the American state among history's villains. Those who are not willing or able to accept this are physically unable to retain the fact that over a million Iraqis are dead. Their brains expel it like a foreign germ.
Noam Chomsky once wrote that the "sign of a truly totalitarian culture is that important truths simply lack cognitive meaning and are interpretable only at the level of 'Fxxx You,' so they can then elicit a perfectly predictable torrent of abuse in response."

That pretty much sums up the how the media reacted to the one million figure in 2007 when it was announced by the British polling firm Opinion Research Business (ORB). (In fact, the firm estimated 1,220,580 Iraqis had died, confirming and updating a separate study done the year before by researchers from Johns Hopkins University and published in the Lancet medical journal.)

Take Kevin O'Brien, deputy editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. Upon receiving a media advisory about the findings from ORB, whose clients include the British Conservative Party and Morgan Stanley, this was his response: "Please remove me from your mailing list and spare me your transparent propaganda."

"We don't do body counts," Gen. Tommy Franks once famously answered a reporter's question about civilian casualties. He's not alone.

Amid all the somber reflections last month (December 2011) about the end of the Iraq War, a specific number of how many Iraqis had died was rarely given. Reporters often described the tally of Iraqi casualties as an "untold number," a somber-sounding phrase that reflects the same level of journalistic effort used for finding the death toll of squirrels in a forest fire.

This line from Reuter's Mary Milliken was typical: "[T]oday was about remembering the untold number of Iraqis and nearly 4,500 Americans who died in the war."

How many Americans died, Mary? Nearly 4,500. And how many Iraqis? Oh, you know, lots. A whole bunch.

"Untold number" implies that there are no available estimates of just how many Iraqis died. In fact there are two: an organization called Iraq Body Count (IBC) has tallied about 110,000 deaths, based on media accounts and health ministry records. IBC admits that its total is surely too low since occupying armies and sectarian civil wars are not known for meticulous bookkeeping, but it disputes the higher figures from ORB and Johns Hopkins.

Methodology debates aside, there are numbers on hand to describe the Iraqi death toll. They are "untold" only by reporters like Kevin O'Brien and Mary Milliken.

The silence around numbers is not so much a conspiracy as a reflection of the fact that some information is simply incompatible with the American imperial mindset.

Consider a different grisly number from a previous decade: According to the United Nations Children Fund, 500,000 Iraqi children died in the 1990s due to United Nations sanctions (rammed through by the U.S.) that barred medicines and other basic necessities from entering the country.

In 2000, the UN humanitarian aid coordinator resigned to protest the sanctions, two years after his predecessor had done the same. Both of these life-long diplomats later used the word "genocide" to describe the American policy.

If you are ignorant of or forgot this information, you are not alone. So did the people who planned the Iraq War. There is no other way to explain the fact that America's war and occupation strategy rested on the expectation that its soldiers would be greeted as liberators by the parents of half a million dead children. (The sanctions, by the way, weren't imposed in the Kurdish north, the only part in Iraq that did not offer massive resistance to the U.S. occupation.)

It's not by chance that many of the most committed antiwar activists are revolutionaries of one stripe or another. We are able to process and comprehend the staggering evil been done to Iraq because we are radicals. And vice versa.

Revolutionaries face the ironic conventional wisdom that because we want to see society radically transformed, we are ends-justifies-the-means fanatics who think nothing of how much blood might be spilled in the process.

But it was then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright who said of the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children that "the price is worth it." And it is current Defense Secretary Leon Panetta who used the exact same phrase recently regarding the second invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Those are the words of a fanatical order that anyone should be proud to oppose with all of their being.
- Danny Lucia is a socialist activist. (A version of this article was first carried by Socialist Worker on January 30, and was provided by IDN-InDepthNews, Analysis That Matters. Visit: www.indepthnews.info.)
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Beyond Belief

2012-02-01T21:19:00.001+04:00

Recently, we have witnessed a vicious campaign orchestrated by certain Jewish-anti-Zionist elements inside the solidarity movement in UK, resulting in the alienation and excommunication of Palestinians and other dedicated activists up and down the country.

Such elements left no stone unturned to ensure the exclusion of activists, the removal of articles and the elimination of links to Palestinian websites from the Solidarity websites. THEY demanded the removal of materials which THEY consider “racist” and “anti-Semitic”, according to THEIR OWN definition, and on the sole evidence of THEIR SAY-SO.

One example of entities involved in that campaign, can be found right in my local Friends of Palestine group (LFOP) of which I used to belong before it was seized by crypto-zionists *****. In this local case the entity is called Merseyside Jews for Peace and Justice, MJPJ, and is affiliated with JFJFP.

The plot became public matters when these MJPJ, endorsed a vicious letter of libellous accusation of racism, and association with Holocaust deniers. Subsequently they also disseminated false information, altogether to further their dubious political objectives, i.e. smearing, crippling and interfighting.

They attempt to justify their actions by expressing alleged “concern(ed) that credence should not be given to contributors who are holocaust deniers or racist”, which defies logic and evidence to the contrary.

And so this same small MJPJ group who endorsed the removal of my article and of the link to Palestinian websites, the removal of articles which examine Jewish-Zionist global networking and the role of world Jewish communities in supporting the Zionist entity, simultaneously demands that links to Jewish-Israeli campaigning groups should be added on LFoP Website; “... links to Jewish campaigning groups like ICAHD, New Profile, Combatants for Peace and Jewish for Peace.”

But it gets worse, and it even defies belief:

On the same LFoP website from which they demand Palestinian articles to be removed, this same Merseyside Jews for Peace and Justice (MJPJ) has published a hagiography of an "Israeli peace activist", who notoriously is a convicted paedophile and a child-rapist.

The convicted Paedophile Ezra Itzhak Nawi (Hebrew: עזרא יצחק נאווי‎; born 1952) was forty years old at the time of committing his criminal act, and his victim was a fifteen years old child. Source

“He has had other convictions, including illegal use of a weapon and possession of drugs - he freely admits to smoking hash - for private use". Source

"According to Ben-Gurion university professor Neve Gordon, in the video Nawi is seen disarming a Palestinian woman of a rock she had picked up some minutes before the alleged assault." Source

"Nawi is on record as saying that, "I’m here to change reality . . The only Israelis these people know are settlers and soldiers. Through me they know a different Israeli" Source

Worse still, the paedophile rapist glorified by MJPJ, who "disarmed a Palestinian woman" of her stone of resistance, and who engages with Palestinians "to change reality" and beautify the face of "Israelis" is a Jewish-Israeli, former IDF who served in the a combat engineering unit, while his victim was a Palestinian child.

The same paedophile Ezra is praised as an "Israeli" Ghandi by another self-proclaimed "supporter of Palestine" in the UK, who also took a leading role in the recent fiasco at AGM of PSC, to ensure that PSC stays focused on its "aims" of "fighting anti-Semitism" and "educating" people about the "unquestionable ideological dogma of the primacy and exceptionality of Jewish suffering".

In civilized countries, children welfare comes before any other. Child predators and convicted paedophiles are prohibited from having free access to children, children are protected by law. The opposite is true if you happen to be a Palestinian child living under "Israeli" occupation, and most certainly the opposite is true in the case of the convicted paedophile Ezra Nawi:

“For the last decade he has set up summer day camps for their children, brought in projectors to show them films, and taken them on trips to Jericho where, for the first time in their life, they can have an opportunity to swim." Source

“I’m not just another activist" . Ezra brags. "Over the years I’ve come into contact with dozens of supporters from all over the world..... The fact that in Ireland and Europe they care about me – this is our strongest weapon.” he proclaims.
While Palestine, Palestinians their heartrending struggle and their incessant sacrifices fades into the background as the "light" of this "hero" illuminates the scene and his plight captures the hearts of the world of activism.

Never mind the ten thousand unknown, unnamed Palestinians languishing in "Israeli" prisons many of them for decades.

Never mind the hundred of thousands of Palestinians who have been in "Israeli" prisons at some point in their lives.

Never mind the hundreds of Palestinian children who are still being tortured, raped and abused by "Israeli" terror squads.

The value of life of Palestinian people cannot be compared to that of Ezra Nawi, the "extraordinary human being" who is certainly "not just another activist", and who "deserves" hundred of thousands of letter of support from across the globe.

Let me get this right: LFOP's Jewish-anti-Zionist members engage in defamation against a Palestinian co-member, under the typical Zionist false and ludicrous pretext “anti-semite racist” allegation. They then demand the removal of articles and links to Palestinian websites. Then the same individuals engage in implicit promotion of an Jewish-Israeli who has been convicted of statutory rape of a Palestinian boy, by portraying him as a Jewish-Israeli humanist hero-victim! All this, we are supposed to believe "for the sake of Palestine".

I for one, doubt it is the agreed position of the majority of LFOP's members, that MJPJ is given a virtual platform to promote on one hand the welfare of paedophile-rapists predators whose victims are vulnerable children living under duress of occupation, and on the other hand to use the LFOP website to dupe its members toward concentrating their efforts to yet another “Jewish-Israeli-hero-victim” and thereby diverting their energy, time and attention away from the Palestinians.

Activism that involves the promotion of the welfare of such an individual is at best detrimental to Palestinians and their children, as the promoters ignore as irrelevant the behaviour of paedophile-rapists "Israeli" predators whose victims are vulnerable Palestinian children living under duress of occupation, and at worst criminal as their praise and promotion indicates an implicit apologetic endorsement of such behaviour.

This is appalling.

How could MJPJ and LFoP fail to perceive the distasteful obscenity of such positioning.

Indeed recently some of us met a refugee from Gaza. A brilliant young man who has suffered atrocious torture and statutory rape by Israeli soldiers. He almost died under torture. Almost two decades after the facts, his body is still covered with shocking scars, and his soul is affected by far worse scars. Due to his tormentors, he had to escape from Gaza for 21 years. He was not there when his father died. He was not there when all his siblings were killed during the winter 2008-09 Israeli invasion.

While improbable, it can not be excluded that this Jewish-Israeli rapist for which MJPJ wants you to concentrate your activism on, could well be the rapist and tormentor of this young Gazan refugee; and as a matter of fact, there is at least one verified Palestinian victim of this Jewish-Israeli predator "peace-activist".

And yet, MJPJ has the gall to ask from supporters on LFOP's website, to be active for the sake of this Jewish-Israeli rapist paedophile, and to campaign for him, and even present him in glorifying terms, almost religiously gloating in admiration for him!!!

“His name is Ezra”

“Without Ezra.....” international activists would not be able to stay in south Hebron villages.
“Without Ezra.....” Palestinian school children would still go the long way, under attack.
“Without Ezra.....” Palestinian farmers would not be able to go to their land.
“Without Ezra.....” Palestinians would still be attacked by settlers.
“Without Ezra.....” Palestinians would have no one to call when they worry, under attack.

“His name is Ezra”

…. Wow, all this by himself, single handedly? Oh My Oh My... What a Jewish-Israeli hero we have here....! What would poor internationals, poor Palestinians and their children do without him?

Does it not appear obvious, how obscenely manipulative this is?

This appalling obscenity did not happen in a vacuum, by sheer coincidence.

Is it really difficult to comprehend that beyond all this attention, exaggeration and hyper-celebration of a such a persona there must be an agenda that is obviously divergent from Palestinians' agenda?

Thus, is it hard to see that those who engage in diverting the attention from Palestinians to "Israelis", from Palestinian suffering to "Israeli" suffering, from defending Palestinians to defending "Israelis" and from the aspiration of Palestinians to the aspirations of "Israelis" are indeed sabotaging the consensus that unite supporters of Palestine? Is it not obvious that such diversion stands in stark contradiction with the general aims of any group that supports the Liberation of Palestine and Palestinians?

How in the world would this reflect well on a group which calls itself “Friends of Palestine”?

So far, the picture does look pretty grim: they have alienated many activists, including the only Palestinian on board. No method was spared: lies, false accusations, defamation, personal attacks, meddling in private affairs and even psychological and emotional manipulations. Thus the humanist aims being polluted, discourse being stifled, information filtered, and without even realizing the Friend of Palestine group has been steered away from supporting the Liberation of Palestine, to supporting "peaceful coexistence" with "Israeli" war criminals and "former-terrorists" to be.

One would've hoped that a group calling itself “Friends of Palestine”, would have more capacity of independent thinking, and more astute ability to refuse to be hoodwinked or manipulated.

How would this reflect on an organization that was established to support Palestine and the Palestinian struggle for Liberation? Considering the category of crimes Palestinians are exposed to, namely Genocide, considering the intensifying nature of such crimes, daily theft of land and property and the abhorrent hasbara that accompany such wickedness; these type of betrayals and crippling behaviour are a disgrace.

But alas, the group has succumbed to the manipulations of few individuals who while hiding behind some faked efficiency which can be resumed in one sentence: “There's nothing to think about or scrutinize, let's go out distribute leaflets or let's do a fundraiser”, thus preventing other members from perusing true understanding of the ENORMITY of the CATASTROPHE of Palestine:
Never mind using intelligently the individual talents and competences of LFOP's members;
Never mind the ever-diminishing size of the group;
Never mind the abuse of the website and its potential by few members;

And above all: Never mind that the achievement of our goals of defeating the Jewish-Zionist occupiers of Palestine is simply not possible without comprehensive understanding of their ideology, their motivations, their method of operation and the VITAL ROLE of the global network of their supporters.

Pity Palestine . . . Pity the World . . . to have such Control-Freaks and Political Commissars as "Peace-Activists" !

***** crypto-zionists: They believe that "Jewish-Israelis" who occupied Palestine by wars of aggression have the right to keep what they acquired by conquest, have the right to colonize and reside in Palestine permanently (according to them giving land and property back to Palestinians will create another injustice!).

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

From LFOP's website:

"Merseyside Jews for Peace and Justice is an independent Merseyside organisation that campaigns for peace and justice in the Middle East. We work closely with Liverpool Friends of Palestine, e.g. organising public meetings, doing educational work and participating in joint activities.
We also are in close contact with other Jewish organisations with similar aims, across the world.

Some months ago, Jewish Voice for Peace and Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky and Neve Gordon reported the arrest of one of Israel’s most courageous human rights activists.
His name is Ezra Nawi.

Since then, over 11,000 people have written 110,000 letters to the Israeli attorney general and various embassies, and 20,000 have watched the remarkable video of his false arrest for trying to stop the demolition of a Bedouin Palestinian home.

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/301/t/9462/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27357

The outpouring has been amazing, and has strengthened all of us working to make a moral and just world. But the message has not gotten through, not yet.
In the last month alone, Ezra has been arrested four times, twice in Susya and twice in Hebron, only to be released a few hours later with no charges. The last time he was arrested was right after this campaign began.

His name is Ezra Nawi

We need more letters, more media stories and more activism.
This time, we will not only direct your letters to the embassies but also to the Minister of Public Security demanding that the police stop harassing Ezra.

Ezra is just weeks or even days away from the sentencing. He may be sent to jail.
I find myself starting to imagine the unimaginable, life without Ezra.

Without Ezra, it would be extremely difficult for international activists to stay permanently in the south Hebron villages so they can help and protect families.

Without Ezra, the school children of Tuba might still be taking the long way to school to avoid walking near the violent settlers.

Without Ezra, the farmers of Gawawis, a small village that was occupied by settlers, would not have been able to return to their lands.

Without Ezra, the people of Tuwane might still be enduring attacks by settlers from the Ma’on outpost every Friday night, and have no access to most of their lands.

Without Ezra, many of the families in the South Hebron area would have no one to call when they are under attack, trapped at checkpoints, or worried about their homes.

Write a letter now so none of us has to imagine life without Ezra Nawi, not even for a day.

His name is Ezra Nawi.

Syrian Paper ... Blown Away By Hard Choice?!

2012-02-01T21:18:00.000+04:00

By Reda Al-Chab

More than ten months have passed and the Syrian crisis hasn't witnessed yet its track towards solution... The crisis has attracted all the key players on the regional and international political stage.

Some have drawn the direction of their diplomatic positions with the quill of interests associated with the fall of the current regime, including the United States, the European Union's countries, Turkey, as well as Arab countries and particularly Crown kingdoms.

However, others like Iran, Russia and China remained firm in support of their strategic ally.

Damascus' reply to its loyal friends was manifested by political and economic reforms that the Syrian leadership announced its adoption through launching the process of their application in more than one occasion.

And between the battle of positions and international countermeasures, the decisive word lies in Syria's internal front.

This is what the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad clearly read in the book of recent field developments in his country what drove him to declare openly in his recent speech that "what Syria is facing is an unprecedented battle.

Al-Asaad remarks came in parallel to the outbreak of terrorist bombings and assassinations that hit for the first time the neighborhoods and streets of the capital, Damascus, which was until the near time away from security disturbances.

Today, the political and ground scene reflects the following:

In the field: As clashes between the Syrian army and militants in some troubled areas such as Homs, Daraa, Idlib and other parts of central and northern Syria floated to the surface, the scene included new factors resembled by armed groups' control to areas and entire neighborhoods.

A fact that resulted from army's reluctance in moving towards a speedy settlement in order to prevent the loss of citizens' lives and thus waiting the right time to attack.

Meanwhile, another factor of Syrian army's hesitation is manifested by the reinforcement and cross-border support to these armed groups, especially from Turkey and some European countries.

In this context, Iran uncovered that it "possessed documents proving West's and particularly French arming to weaponry groups in Syria."

All these mentioned factors enhanced the ability of these armed groups to impose their military presence which is no longer a secret to be covered, not even on the Arab observers' mission to Syria, whose Sudanese Chief General Mohammad Ahmad al-Dabi asserted that "some Syrian areas have become resistant to authorities."

Similarly, the development was also recognized by the Secretary General of the Arab League Nabil al-Arabi, who said in the latest Arab Ministerial meeting in Cairo, which approved the renewal of the Observers' Mission, that "there are areas controlled by armed and undisciplined groups," warning "of the possibility of civil war."

At the political level, the US-France front is characterized by chilliness taking into account the presidential election that the two countries are preparing for.

In parallel, The Turkish axis is busy re-counting its calculations after the late waking up on the nightmare of political and economic losses it is suffering.
Ankara's losses began to appear on more than one level as a result of the deep gap between the target of toppling President al-Assad's regime and the tools to achieve this goal on the ground.

Moreover, the ongoing confrontation continues in the Arab camp, between callers to the necessity of giving the Syrian regime an opportunity to perform its reformist intentions, and between those who adhere to topple the regime even at the expense of the last drop of Syrian blood.

Here, political backstage talks about current clash of visions that is taking place behind closed doors between Cairo on one hand, and Qatar and Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, in dealing with the Syrian paper.

The two kingdoms are pressuring towards dragging military Arab forces to Damascus to be followed by an international military intervention of blue hats (UNIF) type under the title of the Security Council.

The two Gulf countries aim is particularly linked to excluding a strong regional player, a partner to Iran and the resistance forces in the region i.e. Syria.

Cairo defends the option of peaceful solution suggesting the need to give the Syrian regime opportunity of applying promises of reform.

As the Egyptian military keeps in mind the threat of armed groups, it notes to roots of ideas that are established on killing all those who carry contrary views even if they belonged to the same sect and religion.

This was clearly reflected in the recent meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo.

The desire of the AL's Secretary-General and former Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Arab appeared in his willingness to extend the Observers' Mission to another month, speaking of "relative cooperation of the Syrian authorities."

In return, Qatari Prime Minister Hamad Bin Jassim highlighted his country's desire for "dragging Arab troops and UN interference" while the Saudi wrath appeared in the speech of the Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal talking of the "withdrawal of his country's delegation from the Arab mission in Syria."

On the other front of the battle, Iran, Russia and China haven't stopped reiterating their support for the Syrian regime in its edition of reforms, warning of the of civil war phantom whose first and last loser would be the Syrian people.

In this context, and after the Russian's and Chinese's repeated letters through the veto in the Security Council against any decision aimed at targeting Damascus, the announcement of a clearly defined military aspect was delivered from Moscow through sending a warship to the Syrian coasts of Tartous.

The well-read message clearly warned all those concerned that "any aggression against Damascus is a red line that Western countries mustn't try to pass."

Source: moqawama.org

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Another 11 Iranian Visitors Kidnapped in Syria

2012-02-01T21:04:00.000+04:00

At least eleven Iranian visitors have been kidnapped in Syria on a road between the city of Hama to Damascus, according to Press TV.

No further details of the incident have surfaced yet.
This is not the first time that Iranians have become the target of abduction by unknown gunmen in Syria over the past months.

A group of unidentified armed men attacked a bus carrying Iranian visitors on January 26 on the road connecting Damascus to the northwestern city of Aleppo.

The assailants kidnapped 11 men and drove off to an unknown destination, leaving the female passengers in the vehicle. Their whereabouts still remain unknown.

Meanwhile, five Iranian electrical engineers were also kidnapped by unknown gunmen in the restive Syrian city of Homs on December 21, 2011. Later, two other Iranians, who were trying to obtain information about the missing men, were also kidnapped, and their whereabouts were still unknown.

Source: Press TV

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Syrian Free Army Commander: "I control 50% of Syria!" 'We will settle scores with Hassan Nasrallah'

2012-02-01T20:43:00.000+04:00

Supreme Commander of 'Syrian Army Deserters' from his little Turkish hideout: " Damascus is in panic: I control 50% of Syria!"

"Syria's rebel forces claimed Wednesday to have taken over 50% of the country, asserting previous statements that "Damascus is in a panic."
Free Syria Army commander Colonel Riad al-Assad said that despite his forces control of half of Syria, the troops were avoiding taking over entire areas for fear that their fighting with President Bashar Assad's forces would leave havoc in their wake..."

Via FLC

"...The secretary general of the Free Syria Army's military council warned that Syrian rebels will settle the score with Nasrallah and his group at court once the Syrian leader is deposed..."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

“Divide et Impera”

2012-02-01T17:36:00.003+04:00

“Divide et Impera”

by Laura Stuart

It appears that the policy of “Divide and Rule” that has served the super-powers of the day so well since the times of Caesar and the Roman Empire, is again being put to use in the Middle East. Setting Muslim against Muslim is becoming a real possibility. Perhaps the realisation that it was fighting protracted and unwinnable wars in Muslim lands, has led the United States/Israel to consider ways of stirring up Shia against Sunni. This surely would maximise the shedding of Muslim blood with the minimum of investment and effort and, as ever, provide rich pickings for the weapons industry.
Reading an article in “The Jewish Chronicle” entitled “P.A. Share Israel’s Nuclear Iran Fears”, two issues spring to mind. The first is that the Palestinian Authority is the worst of collaborators, and wholly unfit to represent the brave Palestinian people. This much was made clear on the release of the Palestine Papers last year.

“The Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, Salam Fayyad, has attacked the behaviour of Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and said that he shares Western – and Israeli – concerns with the Iranians’ nuclear project”.

The second thought is that there may be a much bigger long-term strategy here – a strategy which may have been in the planning even before the invasion ofIraq. The post- invasion Shia/Sunni unrest might have been a coincidence but it is still one which, in my opinion, is now being heavily manipulated to Western advantage.
After Iraq; Bahrain another country with a Shia majority but ruled by Sunnis and where Shia are treated unequally, has erupted into protests. Civilian protesters are being crushed with terrible force and these protests have been brutally suppressed with the seemingly tacit approval of Western governments who, at the same time have bandied about empty words about human rights to Arab leaders. On a sincerity-scale of 1 to 10 these measure about one and a half – that is, marginally better than the completely empty statements they occasionally issue chiding Israel for its murderous acts against Palestinian civilians (or indeed American and Turkish Human Rights Activists). And of course, an ex British police officer is helpfully supplying the Bahraini leadership with the “know how” to deal with protesters, while the U.S.A. supplies the tear gas and the practical weaponry needed to do the job. The result is an ongoing and steadily-climbing death-toll.
Less well-publicised is Yemen, another country where Saudi forces have been active in invading, bombing and fighting the Houthi Shia. Yemeni civilians get no press coverage when they are killed by American drones, or by Western backed Yemeni forces. Even the completely unconstitutional murder of an American child warrants only a miniscule mention in the International Main Stream Media.
Playing on the historical schism between Sunni and Shia Muslims may be fruitful but it is still just a continuation of an old and proven policy of “Divide and Rule” – a policy to which Muslim leaders should have long since become wise, but sadly they have not. Money is there to be made as Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Emirates spend millions of dollars increasing their fighting capability to counter a perceived threat from an increasingly belligerent Iran. The question is whether this present increase in tension between the Gulf States and Iran is part of a long-term strategy to keep the Middle East weak and destabilised for decades to come.
A strong and united Muslim world is something Israel/America would not want to see and they are seemingly ready to go to great lengths to prevent it from ever becoming a reality.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

A Camel never sees its own hump

2012-02-01T09:21:00.000+04:00

A Camel never sees its own hump

The Arab-League-of-States:
a dictator´s-club !!

The Arab League of States has about 20 members.

This league has recently demanded that Syria
changes its regimes into..... " more democracy " .

It is the first time in its history

that this League demands anything
from any of its member.......

With all due respect ,
(whenever and where respect is still due),

I say that only Tunisia , Egypt, Jordan and the Lebanon

would have the right to demand " more democracy "

from Syria or from any other Arab-country.......

All other members ought to refrain
from demanding any other member to become
better than what they ,themselves, are not :

1- half of those members do not even hold elections

2- the other half , never lost any elections........

To "shut-up"
would be my humble advice to them ,
but I shall also remind them of an Arabic-proverb
" A Camel never sees its own hump "

الجمل ما بيشوف حردبته

Raja Chemayel------رَجا شْمَيِّل

NB :The PA made an election, but it did not like the results,..................and the rest is now history.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Haneyya discusses Palestinian developments with Amir of Qatar

2012-02-01T08:30:00.000+04:00

Palestinian Flag and New Palestinian Map as approved by "Arab Spring"

And New Page
Mishaal meeting with Jordanian monarch turned new page

Haneyya discusses Palestinian developments with Amir of Qatar

[ 31/01/2012 - 06:19 PM ]
DOHA, (PIC)-- The Amir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al-Thani, discussed Palestinian developments with Gaza premier Ismail Haneyya and the accompanying delegation on Tuesday.
Haneyya and the accompanying delegation arrived in Doha on Monday night on a few days visit at the onset of a tour, the second in a month, that would also take them to Iran and a number of Arab capitals.

The Palestinian delegation was received at Doha airport by Qatari state minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Nasser.

Taher Al-Nunu, the government of the Gaza government who is accompanying Haneyya, said that the premier would discuss with the Amir bilateral relations, dangers threatening Jerusalem, and other issues of mutual concern.

Haneyya’s first tour took him to Egypt, the Sudan, Turkey, and Tunisia over a period of two weeks.

Haneyya told a meeting for businessmen in Gaza on Sunday that Qatar was willing to contribute in the reconstruction of Gaza and that he would take with him a group of projects to be discussed in this framework.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Some Nazi leaders betrayed by Zionists

2012-02-01T08:13:00.000+04:00

Posted on February 1, 2012 |

“Had I been a Jew, I would have been a fanatical Zionist. I could not imagine being anything else. In fact, I would have been the most ardent Zionist imaginable,” Adolf Eichmann, 1955, published in Life magazine in 1960. The Zionist-regime executed Eichmann in 1961 for ‘war crimes’.
Zionist Professor Peter Longerich (University of London), in his latest book, “Heinrich Himmler”, has claimed that Heinrich Himmler and his assisstant Reinhard Heydrich played a major role in extermination of Jews in Europe. Zionist leaders and historian are affraid that if public find out Zionist collaboration with Nazis – it would the end of Holocaust, and hundreds of billions of dollars industry. Its importance was shown by an Israeli poll results released last week ahead of International Holocaust Day. According to poll over 90% Israelis believe that Israel can survive without Jewishness but not without Holocaust which has become the new Jewish religion.
Towards the end of World War II Adolf Eichmann (on behalf of Heinrich Himmler) offered Rezso Kasztner, a Zionist Hungarian leader, the freedom of up to one million Jews in return for 10,000 trucks. Surprisingly enough, this offer was ignored by the Zionist organizations that had realized by then that the annihilation of European Jewry would help generate enough support among the nations for the future establishment of the Zionist entity. Apparently, the Nazi offer was reduced to a single train and just 600 devoted Zionist Hungarian Jews. Clearly, the Zionists were interested in saving neither assimilated nor Orthodox Jews.
The SS (Schutz-Staffel, or Protective Echelon) was organized by Heinrich Himmler on Hitler’s orders, and it functioned as a Nazi brain trust. According to Zionist Jewish historian, Lenni Brenner, by 1934, several Zionist German had reached top positions in the SS, like von Mildenstein and chief of the SS Security Service Reinhard Heydrich. Both of them penned articles in praise of Zionism in Nazi propaganda organs – Der Angriff:”A Nazi went to Palestine” and extolling racist Zionism for Das Schwarze Korps. Hitler’s propaganda minister, Dr.Goebbels had a long pro-radical Zionist article published in a Nazi publication named Der Angriff and had a medal struck, bearing on one side the swastika, on the other the Star of Zion (aka David).
Close ties existed between the SS and some of the armed European Jewish organizations, like Haganah, the military arm of the Jewish Agency in Palestine, which was under the control of the WZO. Israeli leaders such as Moshe Dayan and Yitzhak Rabin had served in the Haganah.
Heinrich Himmler committed suicide on May 23, 1945 in British intelligence custody. He was buried inside an unmarked grave on Luneburg Heath – its precise location kept secret for fear of it becoming a place of pilgrimage for German nationalists. In March 2011, Corporal Guy Adderley’s family tried to auction Himmler’s photo on his deathbed in Bristol. However, just before the sale, the photo was withdrawn as result of threats from Zionist groups.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Historic Revision is a gift to humanity

2012-02-01T08:02:00.000+04:00

by Mister Cellophane

The twentieth century could be marked as the holocaust century; it was a time like no other for it’s scale of mass-murders and genocides. The holocausts of the twentieth century — each of them — should be studied, revised with an eye toward historic accuracy; and those revisions should be described in publications as often as opportunity permits. The more people know about the genesis — the driving forces behind these atrocities, the better they will be able to recognize the behaviors and events that lead to such holocausts.

Yagoda

The holocaust that can teach us the most is the Ukrainian Holocaust, also known as the Holodomor. But there has been something of a blackout on this worst holocaust of the first half of the twentieth century. I think the reason this holocaust has not received the study and exposure in publications that it deserves, is that many of the key players in this mass-murder of 8-11 million people were Jewish men and women. The influence that Jews have in controlling what is studied at the college level, published in the mainstream, and what movies get made and distributed, has kept this sad chapter hidden from most of the world. Because Jews were among the perpetrators of this, the worst holocaust in Europe, it has been stuffed down the memory hole. Luckily, several books have slipped past the gatekeepers, and they tell a tale that is among the most tragic I have ever studied.

Of course, the leader of the Soviet Union at that time was Stalin. When a person reads anything about the Ukrainian holocaust, his name is usually the only one you will see connected to that crime; and the genocide is generally minimized, or made to look like something that it wasn’t. But just as Hitler couldn’t have carried out the Nazi holocaust alone, Stalin didn’t carry out the Ukrainian holocaust by himself. Hitler had Heinrich Himmler, Joseph Goebbels, Rudolf Hess and Hermann Goring, while Stalin had Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich, Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Skryabin (Molotov) and Enokh Gershevich Ieguda (Genrikh Grigoryevich Yagoda), to name just a few. While it’s quite common to point-out the German ethnicity of Hitler’s helpers, it is also quite common (and expected) for members of the Jewish community — or any non-Jewish writer of that history — to attempt to hide the Jewish ethnicity of Stalin’s comrades in mass-genocide.

There are many good reasons why the Ukrainian genocide needs further study, and recognition world-wide. At this point in time, many Jews and Gentiles alike believe that the word holocaust is a Jewish trademark; a word that belongs to the Holocaust Industry and Jewish shoah merchants; to use and profit from as they see fit. The misuse and promotion of the Nazi holocaust narrative has stripped all the victims of that crime of their sacred place in history, and turned them into a commodity, to be traded-on for large sums of money, political arm-twisting, and as fuel for culturally destructive victim-mythology. If the same amount of energy were given to learning about the Ukrainian holocaust, the Nazi holocaust might then be put into proper perspective and context. Nazi victims might no longer be used as leverage for profit, victim-mythology, and the theft of Palestinian lands. If the world knew that Jews were big players in the Bolshevik mass-murders that claimed upwards of 60 million people, Jews would ultimately benefit by being forced to face-up to the fallacy that they are superior. Jews willingly participated in the same kind of crimes as Nazis, and there can be no claim to superiority when such truths undoubtedly exist.

All of the worlds greatest historians have been revisionists, constantly looking back at primary sources in an effort to bring clarity and truth to history. The two historic events that face an uphill battle in that regard, are the Ukrainian and the Nazi holocausts. The only obstacle to bringing truth and clarity to those events by means of continued historic inquiry and revision, is Jewish tribal chauvinism. All other events in history are welcome and respected subjects for historical revision. The truth of those holocausts, when compared and put into context, threaten many Jews in their belief that they are the worlds singular victims; superior in their morality and intellect, and chosen by the God they have invented. Telling the whole truth about the holocausts of the first half of the twentieth century could work to deflate the Jewish ethos of superiority, and force them to face the fact that they are human, just like the rest of us.

Unfortunately, many Jews fight and dread the equalization that would occur if they were forced to face these simple truths. Many choose to expend enormous amounts of energy attempting to stigmatize revisionists as misfits. They curse them with words like anti-Semite, neo-Nazi and racist, in an effort to paint them as perverted social deviants. But how can a person who seeks truth and clarity in history possibly be considered a deviant? How is it possible to stigmatize a person for simply wanting to reach a truthful understanding of historic events? It isn’t, of course. The only thing revisionists are deviating from is Jewish demands to control historic narrative, for their own benefit. It’s about control: It has nothing to do with respecting historic truth. If it did, Jews would welcome revisionism with open arms. Calling a person an anti-Semite for seeking the truth is the true social perversion. It’s the true deviation from decency, and it should be stigmatized for the dishonest act that it represents.

Of course, the people who might benefit the most from the truth of twentieth century holocausts are the Palestinians. They are presently suffering a slow motion genocide by a group of people who’s ancestors willingly participated in the Ukrainian holocaust, and the rest of the Bolshevik mass-murders. But the Palestinians can’t hold-out as long as the Ukrainians could. If Jews would only face up to the facts surrounding their participation in the murder of 60 million people in Soviet Russia, then they might — if only out of shame — stop repeating genocides, and the Palestinian people might not perish for good. Holocausts need to be looked at honestly. The participants need to be named, and the profiteers need to be exposed, and that includes the ongoing Palestinian holocaust. Historic revisionism is a gift to mankind, as it continues to clarify the mistakes we have made through time. We cannot learn from these terrible events if they are guarded by clownish anti-Semitic thought police, and turned into orthodox Jewish religious dogma. Or as in the case of the Ukrainian holocaust, simply white-washed out of existence to hide the criminal complicity of communist Jews.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Gilad Atzmon: The Wannsee Conference- Truth and Myth

2012-02-01T00:04:00.002+04:00

Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 8:10AM

Gilad Atzmon

Last week, as Jewish Lobbies continue to invest enormous efforts in dictating and imposing a rigid and unquestionable Holocaust narrative, Israeli Haaretz published a short, succinct and courageous report challenging the validity of the Wannsee Conference as proof of the Nazi final solution.

Just ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day, the Israeli paper reported that Dr. Norbert Kampe (63), director of the "Wannsee Conference" Memorial Centre in Berlin, has challenged some of the most widely-accepted historical facts associated with the conference and its meaning.

Jewish Holocaust scholars have always insisted that the master plan for the Nazi Judeocide was conceived at the Wannsee Conference but Dr. Kampe is quoted as saying that the conference dealt only with "operational matters"‌ instead of being a platform of any form of "decision making"‌. To prove his point, Kampe pointed to the fact that Hitler and his ministers were not present at the conference. Furthermore, he says, "At the time, January 1942, there was no organized plan for extermination camps."

And yet, Haaretz admits, "Make no mistake. Kampe is not anti-Semitic. Certainly not a Holocaust denier. On the contrary. As expected of a professional historian, he studied countless relevant texts, documents and testimonies on the particular eventâ€¦His conclusion is the direct outcome of an educated analysis of written material in his possession."‌

So courageously, a Hebrew paper praises Kampe and his "fascinating historical lesson"‌ and also acknowledges that the Israeli Ministry of Education lacks the capacity to engage in any form of informed Holocaust debate. Haaretz clearly admits that

"to this day no one knows with complete certainty and confidence what exactly happened on 20 January 1942, in this pretty villa in the wealthy suburb of Berlin."‌

Only one copy of the Wansee Conference protocol, found in 1947, survived the war, others having been deliberately destroyed by the Nazis in an effort to conceal evidence. This protocol is the only authentic documentation as to what happened in Wannsee and one of the few that made explicit use of the term "final solution". However, Haaretz concedes that, like any historical document, the Wannsee document should be read carefully. The words "death" or "murder" do not appear in the conference protocol. Instead, it refers to â€œnatural diminution", "appropriate treatment", "other solution options" and "different forms of solutions." In fact, the only explicit references in the document deal with deportation rather than extermination. Even the famous table attached to the protocol that counts the Jews in each occupied country, does not state that those Jews are destined to be destroyed.

Just a few days ahead of Holocaust Memorial Day, a Hebrew paper found the courage to admit that "decades of Holocaust research could not find a clear and explicit command made by high-level Nazi officials to engage in systematic mass extermination of Jews."‌

According to the Israeli paper, the Nazis disguised their true intentions in some "ambiguous orders and"secret codes"‌, which were supposed to lead officers to interpret and to react upon what they believed to be Hitler's will.

The moral here is simple. Once again we learn that some Israelis are far ahead of the Western press and academia in their criticism of Jewish ideology in general and the Zionist Holocaust narrative in particular.

Gilad Atzmon's New Book: The Wandering Who? A Study Of Zionist's global interests and influence Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Likely Hezbollah Drone Explodes at Secret Israeli Airbase

2012-01-31T23:52:00.000+04:00

Monday, January 30, 2012 at 8:59AM Gilad Atzmon

Source

An exclusive report from a confidential highly-placed Israeli source says that a booby-trapped drone crashed and exploded at the top-secret Israeli airbase Sdot Micha. Sdot Micha (also profiled here) 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, which covers a large area just outside Bet Shemesh.

Sdot Micha airbase

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, 10 miles from Sdot Micha. 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.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Fire Burn and Cauldron Bubble: Eye of Newt and the ‘Invented’ Palestinians

2012-01-31T23:49:00.000+04:00

“Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn, and cauldron bubble”

“Perhaps unsurprisingly, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives seems to have a history of deserting the women in his life precisely at moments they find themselves battling debilitating illnesses. Gingrich divorced his first wife, Jackie, as she was being treated for cancer, and then said adios to his second wife, Marianne, after she had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The 68-year-old is now on his third marriage…”

By Richard Edmondson

Normally I don’t write a whole lot on presidential politics for the simple reason that it’s such a Zionist-controlled cesspool it often seems hardly worth commenting on. Moreover, it has always struck me as intellectually dishonest to single out this or that Republican—as a lot of leftwing bloggers do—for criticism, when the Democrats, including the one presently in the White House, are just as bad if not worse. Even so, here are a few items I couldn’t let pass, the first having to do with Newt Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians being an “invented” people.
Gingrich seems like a reasonably intelligent fellow, and I’m guessing he knows enough about American history to know that white Europeans were not the original Americans. Here are what the original Americans looked like:

Here is what Gingrich looks like:

Gingrich is a white European. For white Europeans to come to America and kill off and displace the original Americans, turn around and claim to be the rightful owners of the land, all the while designating themselves as “Americans” while consigning the original Americans to squalid reservations in the process—very much required a considerable amount of “inventing.” So where does Gingrich get off accusing another people of being “invented”?

Here is what those whom Gingrich dismisses as “invented” look like. These are the original, native, indigenous Palestinians. Notice the brown skin—very similar in shade to the original Americans…

…however, these are Semites. Semites are the people indigenous to the Middle East—just like Native Americans are the people indigenous to America. In other words, the Middle East is the part of the planet Earth in which these people originated. Am I going too fast for you, Newt? Slow me down if I am.

Now as it so happens, there is one other group of people I would like to mention—Ashkenazi Jews. Here is what an Ashkenazi Jew looks like (who happens to be named Benjamin Netanyahu.):

Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites. They are white Europeans. Compare the two photos. Notice a certain familial resemblance:

Let me repeat: Ashkenazi Jews are not Semites, they are white Europeans. For white European/Ashkenazis to come to Palestine and kill off and displace the original Semites, turn around and claim to be the rightful owners of the land, all the while designating themselves as “Semites” while consigning the original Semites to squalid reservations in the process—very much required a certain amount of “inventing.”

(Yes, I know—the terrain is starting to get repetitious, but given the subject matter, it’s inevitable.)

U.S. map showing Native American reservations

Occupied Palestine map showing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians

Are “Ashkenazi Jews” an invented people? Gingrich should avail himself of a book written by a man named Shlomo Sand. And before he makes any more references to the Palestinians as “invented” he should actually, well, open the book and read it. Of course, we don’t know if he’ll bother to do that. Gingrich’s comment about the Palestinians is the bombast of an ignoramus, but rather than suffer public rebuke over his utterance, Gingrich, who in 1999 resigned from Congress after being found guilty of ethics violations, was rewarded with a $5 million check from Zionist Sheldon Adelson—with an additional $5 million donation recently being announced by Adelson’s wife.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives seems to have a history of deserting the women in his life precisely at moments they find themselves battling debilitating illnesses. Gingrich divorced his first wife, Jackie, as she was being treated for cancer, and then said adios to his second wife, Marianne, after she had been diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. The 68-year-old is now on his third marriage. It was the second wife, Marianne, who recently offered some telling revelations about her former husband in an interview with ABC News, disclosing, among other things, that Gingrich wanted to have an “open marriage” in which he would be free to see other women while still remaining married to her—a request Marianne rejected. Moreover, it seems there was one woman in particular Newt was desirous of spending time with—the blonde congressional aide who went on to become his present wife, Callista.

Gingrich and wife Callista in November of 2000--3 months after their wedding

Marianne today

Marianne told ABC her husband had been advised by the doctor treating her for MS that stress should be avoided, but that this evidently did not stop him from moving for a divorce just months after she had been diagnosed.

In her most provocative comments, the ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Newt sought an “open marriage” arrangement so he could have a mistress and a wife.

She said when Gingrich admitted to a six-year affair with a Congressional aide, he asked her if she would share him with the other woman, Callista, who is now married to Gingrich.

“And I just stared at him and he said, 'Callista doesn't care what I do,'" Marianne Gingrich told ABC News. "He wanted an open marriage and I refused.”

Marianne described her “shock” at Gingrich’s behavior, including how she says she learned he conducted his affair with Callista “in my bedroom in our apartment in Washington.”

He always called me at night,” she recalled, “and always ended with ‘I love you.’ Well, she was listening.”

Perhaps even more eye-brow-raising is that, according to ABC, all this was going on at the same time Gingrich was publicly denouncing Bill Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky. If you go to the ABC link and watch the video, you’ll see film footage taken from that era showing Gingrich declaring in a speech he delivered, “There’s no administration in American history with less moral authority than the Clinton-Gore administration.”

One would be hard-pressed to point to a more glaring example of hypocrisy. What are we to make of the fact that such an unscrupulous hypocrite has been embraced by a prominent and wealthy Zionist contributor? Does this not tell us something about, a) presidential politics in America, and, b) the state of Israel itself?

Adelson’s support is widely acknowledged as having been a key factor in Gingrich’s victory in the South Carolina primary. According to Wikipedia, the casino magnate, with a net worth of $21.5 billion, is the 8^th wealthiest American and 16^th wealthiest person in the world. Speaking of Gingrich, Adelson has said , “There is not a better advocate for Israel”—and now thanks to this spigot of wealth, the Georgia Republican has notched up his first presidential primary win. Could there possibly be a plainer, more illustrative example of how Zionism, and Zionist money, have corrupted American politics?

And here’s another rhetorical question: Why does Israel seem to draw so much of its support from some of the most corrupt people on the planet? What is it about the Zionist state that they find so likeable and praiseworthy? I’m not simply talking about the 535 members of the U.S. Congress. No. From France to Germany, from Britain to America, from Belgium to the Netherlands to Denmark, from Spain to Italy to Greece, and from the IMF to the World Bank to the UN Security Council—virtually throughout the entire Western world—the most seriously corrupt, repressive, and dishonest specimens of humanity walking upright on the earth all seem to share one thing in common: they all love Israel.

Imagine that.

All of which brings me to a second point—one which I very much wanted to make about the American political system (although it probably applies to the political systems in all the other countries mentioned as well): namely that it’s a rigged game. It is rigged to ensure that one outcome and one outcome only will occur. Moreover it’s an outcome that will occur repetitively, over and over, time and time again, regardless of the changing faces, the evolving issues, or the advancing body of human thought and knowledge. What I’m speaking of is this: that the system is geared to ensure that the only candidates who stand more than a snowball’s chance in hell of getting elected are the absolute dregs of American society. The most unprincipled. The most corrupt. The most deceitful, profligate, hypocritical, and immoral. The absolute dregs. This is the way the process has been engineered.

In her interview with ABC, Marianne expressed the opinion that Gingrich “lacks the moral character to be president,” but with all due respect to this good lady who endured 18 years of marriage to a hypocrite, she seems a bit confused as to what exactly the job qualifications are for serving as chief executive in this country. Certainly—as we all know—there are bright and talented Americans, Americans who, if given the chance, could, and definitely would, bring the country out of the morass in which it presently finds itself, people of courage, honor, and rectitude, people who remain true to their principles, who would react with indignation were someone to offer them money to invade another country and kill millions of its people, and who would probably even have the person offering such a bribe arrested. Yes. There are lots of Americans like that. They are all over the place. Quite literally. But the thing to keep in mind is that these are the very last people the top 1 percent would ever, ever want to see running the country. Far preferable to them are the moral degenerates. Moral degenerates and miscreants are invariably the ones who get the most money and most media attention, and don’t for a moment believe that’s by accident. As I say the system is rigged. There is no longer anything even resembling a democracy.

Another presidential issue I wanted to comment on, and which kind of ties in with everything I said about Gingrich, is Mitt Romney’s recent impromptu encounter with an Occupy Wall Street protester. Here it is. Check it out.

Now let me see if I understand him correctly. Romney is saying that the rich should continue getting richer and the poor poorer (the trend of the last 30 years or so), and anyone who objects to this state of affairs is being—“divisive”? It isn’t merely that his logic fails the infallibility test. The twin arguments he’s advancing—that wealth should be concentrated and that America should remain united—are diametrically, contradictorily opposed to one another. Wealth disparity, by definition, is a divide. It is a divide between rich and poor. America is very much a divided nation at this moment. It is a country in which CEOs make 325 times the average worker’s pay (up from 263 times as recently as 2009). By trying to reduce economic inequality, the OWS movement is essentially trying to restore unity to the country. If Romney really wanted a united America—rather than an America with a vast gulf between rich and poor—he would actually champion the OWS protesters rather than attack them, but we won’t hear anything like that from Romney because the richest 1 percent are funding his campaign.

Romney, who by the way also insists that corporations are people , vows that if elected president, his first foreign policy trip will be to Israel. No surprise there. But perhaps we could expect him to make a stop at the Cayman Islands on his way home. According to his tax returns, Romney holds a stake in an enterprise called BCIP Trust Associates III, but regulatory filings show that the partnership, valued at $5 million to $25 million, is registered in the Cayman Islands. This presumably would render it sheltered from U.S. taxation. However, with the predictability of a military press office flack denying civilian casualties in the latest drone attack, Romney’s campaign spokesperson, Andrea Saul, has insisted everything is strictly legal and on the up and up.

“The Romney’s investments in funds established in the Cayman Islands are taxed in the very same way they would be if those funds were established in the United States. These are not tax havens and it is false to say so.”

Romney and his wife Ann made $27 million in 2010, and up until that same year held millions in a Swiss bank account. Despite this, their 2010 federal tax rate worked out to 13.9 percent, “a rate typical of households earning about $80,000 a year,” reported the New York Times.

As I said, it’s a bit intellectually dishonest to criticize Republicans while omitting the sins of the Democrats, so let’s talk for a moment about Obama. In his state of the union address last week (full text here ), the chief executive spouted a lot of faux populism, painting himself as a man of action who intends to impose new regulations on Wall Street and close loopholes favoring the rich (apparently hoping people will forget that Wall Street bankers have consistently been among his biggest backers), while championing average Americans. In fact this seems to be his strategy for defeating the Republicans this year: let them flap their jaws about the wonders of the “free market” system while in turn casting himself as a populist—when in fact he is every bit as pro-rich as the Republicans are. In this respect, Obama is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And of course, significantly missing from his speech was any mention of his recent signing of the National Defense Authorization Act, giving the military the authority to arrest U.S. citizens and hold them indefinitely without trial, essentially shredding the last remnants of our constitutional safeguards. It is an ominous, ill-boding development (one of many these days, it seems) that places all of us in jeopardy.

But bad as the NDAA is—and it is indeed bad—that is not the only issue pertaining to the current president that merits attention. A recent campaign video has been the focus of considerable discussion of late, a video so bad, so exaggerated in terms of its worshipful tones, its deference to the Israeli lobby, that it seems to have left some people almost literally cringing. We see images of Obama wearing a yarmulke, visiting the Western Wall, etc.—as well as footage from various speeches in which he extols the virtues of the Zionist state, not his own country mind you, but Israel. Take a look:

The tone is quite reverential, would you not agree? Particularly striking I think is this image:

Obama is in essence worshipping at the altar of the Holocaust religion. Ali Abunimah, at the Electronic Intifada, says the video “takes Israel pandering to dangerous levels,” but actually even more than that is going on. The video is in essence presenting the Zionist state as an object of religious adoration. This is the kind of thing you’d expect to see at a Christians United for Israel conference—not from the Obama campaign. “When I touched my hand against the Western Wall and placed my prayer between its ancient stones, I thought of all the centuries in which the children of Israel had longed to return to their ancient homeland.” What we have here basically is adulation to a deity. Israel is being deified. And of course interjected through it all are Israeli officials bestowing their kosher seal of approval upon the U.S. head of state.

A question has arisen as to whether this is actually an “official” Obama campaign video—or possibly something put together simply to make the commander-in-chief of the United States look like a beggarly, brownnosing fawner. In point of fact, though, if you examine closely you will see that it appears to have been uploaded to YouTube by BarackObamadotcom. So yes, it does look as if it’s a genuine campaign video. But of course, what would you expect? Populist rhetoric is all well and good—it plays well to the masses—but it takes fawning to get Zionist money, and it takes Zionist money to get elected.

And so it goes in the rigged system of U.S. politics. And of course if all else fails, our 1 percent may always fall back upon the electronic voting machines to ensure this year’s election results are the ones they desire…

“For a charm of power trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble…”

***

The Smirk

Thought I would throw this into the mix (or the cauldron, if you prefer) as well. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a human being smirk quite this often in a 23-minute time segment as does one of the guests on this program. Are facial expressions an indicator of what resides in the heart? Speaking purely subjectively here—and based upon my own limited contact with habitual smirkers—the thing we see forming and dissipating…forming and dissipating…at periodic intervals throughout much of the show, seems to suggest something abnormal, an almost psychopathological disgust for any and all things decent.

One statement made on the show is in fact correct, however. The American people are not sheep. They are in fact much worse off than sheep. Sheep follow a herd instinct, a trait that is in their DNA. The herd instinct is a product of nature, one that functions to help ensure the survival of the entire herd, not simply single individuals, and it is a behavior observable in many species of animals. What the American people have succumbed to is not an innate, naturally-occurring herd instinct, but something far more sinister.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Jews in Iran

2012-01-31T23:33:00.000+04:00

Monday, January 30, 2012 at 3:38AM Gilad Atzmon

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!