Is the U.S. Pursuing the Wrong Mideast Peace Process?

By Tony Karon Thursday, Aug. 12, 2010

The recent skirmish on the Israel-Lebanon border has amplified fears that the Middle East could be on the brink of another war. So the fact that U.S. special envoy Senator George Mitchell arrived in Israel this week hoping to restart peace talks ought to offer some reassurance. But it doesn't.

The reason: President Obama's peace process doesn't involve those who could clash with the Israelis this summer.

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whom Mitchell will cajole to talk directly with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is not at war with Israel and will remain on the sidelines if new hostilities break out, just as he did during last year's Gaza war.

The forces on the front lines of the gathering storm — Hamas in Gaza, Hizballah in Lebanon, and Syria — are allied with Iran, and the Obama Administration is maintaining its predecessor's policy of trying to diplomatically isolate the self-styled "axis of resistance."

Some limited overtures have been made to Damascus, largely in the hope of separating Syria from Iran. But absent any move to end Israel's occupation of Syrian territory on the Golan Heights, those will come to naught. The Administration has also made limited overtures to engage Iran on the nuclear issue, using Iran's defiance to strengthen the case Washington makes to less sanguine partners that Iran should be isolated. But it has precious few channels to the relevant leadership should hostilities break out along Israel's northern border or in Gaza. On both of those fronts, an uneasy calm is maintained not by any agreements but by each side's awareness of the damage they could suffer, both physical and political, in a new confrontation. Still, in both cases, the antagonists are operating on the assumption that a new shooting war is inevitable at some point. (See pictures of heartbreak in the Middle East.)

The Bush Administration's diplomatic boycott of the resistance camp failed to stem its rising influence, cemented the alliance of its component parts, and left Washington and its Western allies with precious little access to important decisionmakers. That may not have bothered the Bush Administration much, because it imagined the region as locked in a fight to the finish between radicals and moderates — a grand alliance of whom would join with Israel and the U.S. to vanquish Iran and its allies.

Stability was not the Bush Administration's priority. When anxious Europeans pressed Washington to help end the disastrous 2006 Israeli war against Hizballah in Lebanon, then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice famously responded that she had "no interest in a return to the status quo ante." But, of course, that's largely what resulted, because the projection of force by the U.S. and Israel in the region has failed to eliminate the radicals.

Turkey was the most important U.S. ally to break decisively with the Bush Administration's approach to the region, building its own bridges to the resistance camp in the belief that it couldn't be wished or blown away and that the region couldn't be stabilized without accommodating its interests.

Turkey's approach was pilloried by some in the West and Israel as aligning with Iran. But British Prime Minister David Cameron, following talks in Washington, recently visited Ankara and sought to ingratiate himself with the Turkish leadership by referring to Gaza as a "prison camp" — as Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has done — an apparent attempt to enlist Turkey's support in mediating the region's conflicts. Turkey's good offices with the radicals, combined with its long-standing, if somewhat frayed, security alliance with Israel, may now be a vital channel of communication for avoiding new wars in the region. (See "Bibi and Barack: Can They Bridge the Gap?")

Of course, pursuing peace between Israel and the Palestinians, as the Obama Administration is doing by urging direct talks between Abbas and Netanyahu, needn't work at cross purposes with a broader push to stabilize the Middle East. But it could. (Comment on this story.)

The Bush Administration eventually renewed Israeli-Palestinian peace talks as an element of its strategy to confront Iran, seeing a Mideast peace process as vital to provide political cover for Arab regimes to ally with Israel and the U.S. against Tehran. That was the logic behind the Annapolis conference and subsequent discussions between Abbas and then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.

The process went nowhere, of course. But even if Olmert and Abbas had managed to agree on the contours of a Palestinian state (they didn't), it was clear that any process that excluded Hamas — which had demonstrated in a democratic election that it spoke for as much as half the Palestinian population — was unlikely to gain much traction. And a peace process conceived of as a means to weaken and isolate Hamas and its allies obviously gives them an overwhelming incentive to ensure its failure, which is well within their means.

Still, the Obama Administration maintains the Bush policies of confining its diplomatic engagement largely to friends rather than adversaries.

Once again, the argument is being made in Washington debates that pressing forward the Israeli-Palestinian peace process is a key condition for a successful effort to isolate Iran. But there's no apparent reason to expect that Obama will succeed where Bush failed.

On Aug. 6, a major annual study of public opinion in six Arab countries by University of Maryland professor Shibley Telhami was released. Its latest findings hold some grim tidings for the White House.

Not only has the proportion of respondents holding negative views of Obama almost tripled (to 63%) since his Cairo outreach speech last year, but the notion that the Arab world feels threatened by the idea of Iran's acquiring a nuclear weapon seems questionable. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was found to be the third most popular world leader, at 12% (after Erdogan at 20% and Venezuela's Hugo Chávez at 13%; Obama didn't make the top 20). And the study found that an overwhelming 77% of respondents believed Tehran had a right to its nuclear program — an alarming 57% even believed a nuclear-armed Iran would be better for the Middle East.

Plainly, there's a disconnect between Arab public opinion and the Obama Administration's approach to dealing with the region. If the goal is stabilizing the region and preventing war, it may be time for Obama to heed the advice of late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. When challenged on why he was dealing with Israel's mortal foe, Yasser Arafat, Rabin answered, "We make peace with our enemies, not with our friends."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2009645,00.html#ixzz0wc3998eG



River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Poll – 78% Arabs believe Israel behind Hariri’s murder

Rehmat's World

Posted on August 14, 2010 by rehmat1 

“It’s interesting – but not surprising – to note that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned,” Paul Findley, former Congressman for 22 years, in The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, March 1992.

A poll conducted by jazeera.net during a period of three days, revealed that 78% of the 18,132 Arab participants believe that the evidences presented by Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah are enough to accuse Israel of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri’s assassination. However, 21% of participants believed that those evidences are not enough.

Rafik Hariri, former Prime Minister of Lebanon (1992-98 and 2000-2004) was assassinated in Beirut on February 14, 2005.

Like the 9/11 – within hours, Washington, Paris and Tel Aviv blamed Damascus for the crime. The idea was to get 14,000 Syrian troops from Lebanon which had become a thorn in Israeli design on Southern Lebanon.

On July 21, Fidel Castro warned the world about the US-Israel evil designs on Islamic Republic, Syria and Lebanon.

On August 9, 2010 – Hizbullah Secretary General, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallh presented tangible proof on Israeli involvement in the assassination of Rafik Hariri.

The evidence show footage of Israeli surveillance of the site where Rafik Hariri was killed later and the records which show that Zionist leaders had been trying to convince Rafik Hariri since 1993 that Hizbullah wants to assassinate him.

Sheikh Nasrallah reiterated that he doesn’t trust the international tribunal. He claimed that Hizbullah’s enemies have already spent US$500 million to distort the image of his organization.

Hizbullah is Lebanon’s largest organization involved in social works and rebuilding country’s infrastructure. It’s political wing is partner in the current Unity government and its military wing is the only Arab militia which has defeated Israel Occupation force (IOF), not once but twice (in 2000 and 2006).

Sheik Nasrallah offered his full co-operation if the PM Saad Hariri decide to appoint a national commission to investigate the assassination of his father, Rafik Hariri.

Mohammed Fneish, the cabinet minister belonging to Hizbullah, said that his organization has no faith in the credibility of the UN Tribunal, but that they will turn in the evidence in any event.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gaza, Soweto and African American Thought: Message of Truth

Via Intifada Palestine
13. Aug, 2010

By: Bishop Donald R. Corder

Part 3 of 3: A Message of Truth

Caught in an illusion spun by pride the pinnacle of arrogance was displayed on 14 May 1948 when Israel crowned itself a nation. Historic record discloses these people who cried out that the blood of their Messiah be upon their own heads and that of their children. Bring forth a declaration that these same persons would fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until such a time that God would restore them. Herein rests a question posit beyond the arguments of comparative religions, theology or right and wrong. Rather, we raise the question asserted by Pontus Pilot in 33 A.D., “What is truth?”

Philosophical giants throughout the ages, those who have dedicated their lives to a study of the constructs of reason and mystics have all attempted to apprehend correct discourse and embrace of this illusive notion. Wherein, truthfulness in reporting can be seen to demonstrate spin issuing forth torrent rivers of opinion employed to drive reason from our minds and realization of the truthfulness of former George W. Bush White House personality Karl Rove, wherein he stated that he crafted reality while the rest of us looked on. Let us therefore choose to agree upon this single premise, “That Truth is truth and it can stand by itself without being dressed up. Because when you dress up the truth you have turned it into something else.”
Harmony expressed in writing expresses interaction with nature, other men and provides sensibility in the experiences of life where it’s functionally requires that truth be its own immutable reality. Truth being conceptualized in aforementioned context by necessity is then conformed to experience, facts and actual existence whether it be visible, invisible or beyond the grasps of our humanity. Herein, begging the question “Can a nation stand that was born through the womb of lies, suckled by the blood of both martyrs and the innocent while shaped in the political iniquities of their own moral corruptions?” ‘Is this Truth?’ being the object of our current soul searching.

Setting aside entrée into the supernatural, prophecy and exegesis of the holy writings let us rather propose we delve into historical precedent and the dielectric of simplistic ordering of thought in our deliberation of Truth. Drawing from “Legal Reasoning and Legal Writing by Richard K. Neumann, Jr. to derive our structure, strategy and style to assets the political aspiration framing the policy espoused by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin,

“Our race is the Master Race, we are divine gods on this planet, as different from the inferior races as they are from insects, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races, our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves.”

Whereby we conclude and submit herein such proposal as espoused by the deceased Prime Minister Begin constitutes a nation built upon fallacy and suppositions not conforming to the merits and qualities of Truth as aforementioned and therefore cannot stand or have permanency as a world kingdom.

First: Factual predicate of the Nation of Israel being born through the womb of lies finds historical precedent sited with the beginning of Israeli land grabs of Palestine and the Middle East during the period of the Ottoman Empire (ca.1300–1918). Prophetic and programmatic writing developing Zionist intent was submitted by the likes of Moses Hess, Judah Alkalai, Zvi Hirsch Kalischer and Theodore Herzl. Jews dedicated to rebuilding a national home for the Jewish people likewise were migrating from Russia to Ottoman-ruled Palestine in the 1880’s. But, emerging from deep secrecy a document draft of the minutes recorded of the proceedings attended by the Learned Elders of Zion was brought to light in the late 19^th Century France and later translated by Victor E. Marsden.

Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion disclosed the 24 Protocols for ‘World Conquest through World Jewish Government’ providing the substance of addresses delivered to the innermost circle of the Rulers of Zion. They reveal the converted plan of action of the Jewish Nation developed through the ages and edited by the Elders themselves up to date. From The Protocols: “Only force and cunning conquers in political affairs. Therefore we must not stop at bribery, deceit, and treachery for the attainment of our end. In politics one must know how to seize the rule of others if by it we secure submission and sovereignty.”

Factual support of allegations of Israeli lies employed to further their global aspiration is affirmed when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tells of having deceived the former US president Bill Clinton, into believing he was helping implement the Oslo accords while actually entrenching the occupation, thereby destroying the Oslo process.

Second: Factual predicate of Israeli and Zionist sucking the blood of both martyrs and the innocent is best understood when reading the Jewish Talmud where it states, “The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud…” “Babylonian Talmud”, published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII. Where we are provided the privilege to learn, “The decisions of the Talmud are words of the living God. Jehovah himself asks the opinions of earthly rabbis when there are difficult affairs in heaven.” –Rabbi Menachen, Comments for the Fifth Book. “We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.”-Israel Koenig, “The Koenig Memorandum.”

Factual support of allegations of Israeli bloodsucking and murder are affirmed in late December 2008 after some 1,400 Palestinians (mainly civilians) and 13 Israelis (mainly soldiers) were killed during a 22-day Israeli military offensive into Gaza. Justice Goldstone in his Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (document A/64/L.11) called them Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity. Of particular note is the current and totally disruptive behavior demonstrated as Israel threatens to pull out of the UN’s Gaza flotilla probe as orchestrated in Tel Aviv to stop UN panel from grilling Israeli troops over deadly raid of the flotilla where nine Turkish nationals were murdered in an act of piracy by Israeli Defense Forces in international waters.

Third: “Shaped in the political iniquities of their own moral corruptions,” is set forth herein as a factual tenant directly impacting the permanency of a nation not conformed to Truth. When possible, empires used a common religion or culture to strengthen the political structure and we look again to the writings of the Jewish Talmud in order to better understand the dynamics giving rise to the behavior identified with and supporting our conclusions of argument.

“To communicate anything to a Goy (non-Jews) about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.” –Libbre David 37

Furthermore, “A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them.” –Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17.

There are currently more than 11,000 Palestinians jailed in Israel, including at least 85 women and children, and 11 seriously ill people, according to the Palestinian Authority; average incomes have dropped by more than a third and a quarter of the workforce is unemployed, a massive 47 percent of the Palestinian population in the occupied territories live below the official poverty line, on barely two dollars a day.

“More than 600,000 people – 16 percent of the population – cannot afford even the basic necessities for subsistence as the number of Palestinians working in Israel has plummeted.” Israel Urged to Rescue Palestinian Economy By Sophie Claudet – JERUSALEM

In 1923, radical Zionist Ze’ev Jabotinsky– spiritual father of not only of Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin but of Brooklyn Rabbi Meir Kahane– wrote that the “sole way” for Jews to deal with Arabs in Palestine was through “total avoidance of all attempts to arrive at a settlement”-which Jabotinsky euphemistically termed the “iron wall” approach. Hence, we do now rise and vigorously conclude there is no moral conscience or Zionist design from whence a defense against the factual elements and crimes against humanity cited herein can be prevailed against.

During a sermon preceding the 2001 Passover holiday, the influential Israeli Rabbi Ovadia Yosef exclaimed: “May the Holy Name visit retribution on the Arab heads, and cause their seed to be lost, and annihilate them.” He added: “It is forbidden to have pity on them. We must give them missiles with relish, annihilate them. Evil ones, damnable ones.” Source: Ha’aretz April 12, 2001. Therein after we read “Extermination of the Christians is a necessary sacrifice.” –Zohar, Shemoth.

In Conclusion: Let us therefore choose to agree upon this single premise, “That Truth is truth and it can stand by itself without being dressed up. Because when you dress up the truth you have turned it into something else.” Let us therefore assert emphatically and without exception that herein is described a nation who has been deceived and prepares for themselves the divine seeds of their own destruction.

Special Thanks to Bishop Donald R. Corder

Bishop Donald R. Corder is the spiritual leader of the Spirit of Life International Believers Fellowship and Senior Pastor for the Pillar of Truth Ministries.

Mr. Corder is a published author, grassroots organizer and community activist, in addition to his work in urban and international development as a business consultant and entrepreneur.  Email: DonCorder@gmail.com.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Explaining Murder: Israeli Hasbara in Full Swing

Via Silver Lining

Posted on August 14, 2010 by realistic bird

from Al Jazeera.net

by Richard Lightbown, source

The hasbara industry is in full swing at the moment as Benjamin Netanyahu’s government pulls out all the stops to create a smokescreen to cover its crimes.  Leading from the front Mr Netanyahu sat in front of the Turkel Commission for four hours on Monday, although anyone hoping to hear anything of interest would have been disappointed. Mr Netanyahu only spoke in front of the public for ninety minutes of that time during which he regaled the committee with complaints about Hamas, Sderot and Gilad Shalit.

He told the committee that Israel had a right to search for weapons on board the flotilla. (Israel has since announced that it found no weapons for Hamas. Did nine people really have to die so that Israel could confirm the certification the flotilla already had?) He further told them that there was no humanitarian crisis in Gaza as a result of the blockade it was just a ‘bogus rationale […] to break the blockade’. So there we are. The International Committee of the Red Cross was lying on 14 June when it said:
“The closure therefore constitutes a collective punishment imposed in clear violation of Israel’s obligation under international humanitarian law.”

Or when in 2008 the same august institution said 70% of the Gazan population suffers from food insecurity.  

That Judge Turkel allowed him to drone on in this way bodes ill for the end result. As though nine dead (and it could yet turn to eleven), fifty-five injured and the rest of the 700 people abducted, abused, humiliated and subjected to cruel and sadistic behaviour was not important enough for the committee to concentrate on.
But that as always is the name of the game. Only Israeli victim hood is of any consequence. Nine Israeli hoods got a legal beating. That’s important. Nothing else matters. So we’ve had Prof Ruth Lapidoth prostituting herself on 12 July by cherry picking the San Remo Manual to make it all seem right. She told us Gaza is a state because the Israel Supreme Court said so. Does she recognize no higher authority on international law? The was no mention of course that San Remo takes six articles to explain that any maritime attack should be solely against military targets for the purpose of gaining a military advantage. That precautions must be taken to ensure that civilians are not harmed. That merchant vessels are civilian objects.

That vessels engaged in humanitarian missions are exempt from attack. Article 102 states absolutely, that a blockade is prohibited if the damage to the civilian population is excessive in relation to the military advantage of the blockade. Article 103 allows the right of passage, subject to search (but not murder) if the civilian population is inadequately provided with food and other objects essential for its survival. Article 119 declares that a neutral merchant vessel may be diverted ‘with its consent’. Article 124 encourages certification (exactly as the flotilla had done) to avoid the necessity for visit and search. None of this gets a mention in the professor’s assessment. Mr Netanyahu behaves as though it does not exist.

President Obama of course is in on the scam too. Refusing to condemn Israel on 31 May until he knew the facts, he is now doing his best to see that they are not revealed. Thus the UN Human Rights Commission’s Fact Finding Mission is now deemed surplus to requirements. Never mind that it is chaired by a judge who served on the International Criminal Court, or that it includes the former Chief Prosecutor of the UN backed Special Court for Sierra Leone, who has extensive experience on human rights, war crimes and terrorism. This is a committee eminently qualified to investigate the facts so it is being sidelined and told it is irrelevant by Susan Rice, who was speaking as though she owned the United Nations. Just for the record China and Russia voted for this commission, France and Britain abstained, and the other permanent member of the Security Council, without a veto at the UNHRC, could only vote against. The late Charles Wheeler, a redoubtable BBC journalist, once observed that American presidents get worse and worse. Sadly we don’t seem to have reached the nadir yet.

So what is the invertebrate in the White House trying to palm us off with instead? A committee chaired by a law professor who was prime minister of New Zealand for thirteen months, and representative to the International Whaling Commission. Alongside him will be a man whose period of rule in Columbia was strongly criticised for its abuses of human rights, democracy and the rule of law; and whose main arms supplier was the state of Israel. This Panel will receive reports from Israel and Turkey. But it will not be able to subpoena witnesses (and Mr Netanyahu has made it clear that it will not be able to subpoena anyone from the IDF). Neither will it venture out of New York (to go to Iskenderun for example to look over the three Turkish ships that have been released).

So we must hope that Sir Geoffrey Palmer is his own man, and that he is a man of courage and imagination. We must hope that he is a man able to appreciate that it was not self defence to shoot Cevdet Kiliclar through the forehead from a helicopter before a single Israeli had even started to descend from a helicopter or disembark from a zodiac. (Mr Kiliclar was taking a photograph at the time of his assassination.) Let us hope that Sir Geoffrey will ask for proof of the Israeli allegation that their commandos were shot at, and that he will wonder why the infra red footage from the helicopters have not picked up the flashes from the passenger’s guns. Come to that why have we seen so little of the enormous amount of footage that Israel stole from press and passengers on the flotilla?

But even the Israeli film footage provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs can be quite revealing. Take a look at the arms cache that Israel made such a fuss about. I have counted the following:
• about 16 kitchen knives,
• three pocket knives,
• fifteen pickaxe handles,
• about twenty lengths of metal bar,
• two ring spanners,
• one pipe wrench,
• four small hammers,
• two sledge hammers,
• four fire axes,
• one paint roller handle,
• ten disc-cutter discs,
• two round files in handles,
• a short length of cord and
• two kaffiyehs.
(There was no blood on any of these ‘weapons’.) This is hardly the equipment prepared by a well-organized terrorist cell that had readied itself to face one of the elite units in the Israel Defence Forces.
Also take a close look at the Israeli infrared film taken from the sea towards the Mavi Marmara.  The film unfortunately starts after Mr Kiliclar has been shot dead and other passengers have also been injured and maybe killed. Look close and you can see the pistols being thrown over the side after the commandos are disarmed. Look closely too at the last frame of the infrared footage. There at the side of the ship is a commando with a pistol raised ready to fire. Mostly likely this is a Glock pistol with a magazine holding 17 rounds which can be fired as fast as the trigger can be pulled. Now do you understand why the film stops there? The next sequence shows a small bottle of mace-like self-defence spray, and then a small folding saw with a single 5cm long blade. Yet look behind this primitive weaponry and there inside the door to the bridge lounges a commando with what looks like a submachine gun.
The Israeli military said it would do whatever was necessary to stop the flotilla. When it got to the Mavi Marmara the commandos first tried to board at the stern from zodiacs. They were unable to do this principally because of the fire hoses trained on them, although there were a lot of things like plates and tomatoes thrown at them too. In fact they never did board the ship from this point until after the bridge had been taken and the ship surrendered. The next move, almost certainly with the full authority of Admiral Marom, was to fire live ammunition onto the upper decks from more than one of the four helicopters, and this was probably sniper fire to begin with. Only then did the commandos start to fast rope onto the deck. But even then the defence did not crumble and the first rope was tied up by the defenders and then abandoned so that the commandos only used one rope and were picked off as they came down. It looks pretty brutal on the film (which is why we are allowed to see it). But if they did not disable those commandos quickly the men on that upper deck were going to get shot, and shortly afterwards this is exactly what happened. However it was a close thing. Perhaps if they had tied up both ropes they may have prevented the landing. And then what: what was Israel’s next line of attack, bearing in mind that they had warships and submarines in the near vicinity? If the boarding had failed would the IDF have sunk the ship? One thing is for sure, that would have took a lot of ingenuity for Mr Netanyahu and Prof Lapidoth to explain. It would have needed a lot of excuses from Mr Obama too.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Preliminary Information: Fatah Al-Islam 'Prince' Killed

Preliminary Information: Fatah Al-Islam 'Prince' Killed

14/08/2010 Preliminary information said that Fatah al-Islam 'prince' Abdul Rahman Awad was killed Saturday during a chase with security forces in the town of Chtaura.

According to the official National News Agency (NNA), two Palestinians wanted on terrorism and forgery charges were killed during the chase while a third suspect managed to flee the scene.

The chase began when security forces that had been monitoring the activity of the suspects followed their exit from the Ain al-Hilweh Palestinian refugee camp until their arrival at Chtaura's town square where they were called to halt by an army patrol.

The suspects responded by firing at the patrol and the chase ensued.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Ashton: Abbas will start direct talks with Israelis soon

[ 14/08/2010 - 11:56 AM ]

BRUSSELS, (PIC)-- Catherine Ashton, the European Union's high representative for foreign affairs, affirmed in a letter that Mahmoud Abbas would accept direct talks with Israel and would give a definitive answer in this regard by Sunday or next week.

"Abbas is very close to agreeing to direct talks with Israel," Ashton said in a letter to foreign ministers revealed by different media sources.

"Abbas has requested a few more days for final consultations with Arab partners as well as with the Fatah and PLO executive bodies,” she wrote, pointing out that his talks with Israelis would kick off in late August

The European official also said that a statement would be issued by the international quartet earlier next week if both parties agreed to proceed to direct talks.

She claimed that the quartet's statement would demand Israel to halt all settlement activities in the West Bank and east occupied Jerusalem, and reach a full peace agreement with the Palestinians within 24 months on the basis of 1967 borders.

Abbas had vowed not to resume any kind of negotiations with Israel unless it freezes construction in settlements, but he changed his mind and engaged in indirect talks before declaring his intention recently to sit side by side with Israelis at the negotiations table.

In another incident, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday that a number of Palestinian citizens in Ramallah city were surprised on the first night of Ramadan to see the Palestinians Authority's security men walking together with Israeli soldiers in the city.

It added that security meetings took place in the city and were attended by head of Israel's central command Avi Mizrahi, and senior Israeli officers Nizan Alon and Yoav Mordechai.

The newspaper stressed that there are warm relations and extraordinary cooperation between the Israeli army and the PA security apparatuses in the West Bank, pointing out that this partnership foiled a number of resistance operations against Israel.

Many West Bank citizens, who wanted to cross into Jerusalem for Friday prayers, were also shocked to see for the first time yesterday joint Palestinian-Israeli security presence at Qalandia checkpoint that separates Ramallah from the holy city.

Eyewitness told the reporter of the Palestinian information center (PIC) that members of Abbas's security apparatuses were seen standing at the entrance to the checkpoint, while Israeli soldiers were seen in their usual positions inside the terminal.

They said that the job of Abbas's security men was to organize the flow of Palestinians into the terminal and search them and the Israeli soldiers, for their part, were allowing whoever they want to cross the checkpoint.

Palestinian Authority May Agree to Talks in 2 Days: Report

14/08/2010 Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to agree to the resumption of direct talks with the Zionist entity within as little as two days, Israel Radio relayed on Saturday citing a report by Arabic newspaper A-Sharq al-Awsat.

Abbas is waiting for an anticipated statement from the Quartet to be released early next week before he will announce any decision on talks, the Palestinian news agency Ma'an reported on Friday.

Abbas may agree to direct talks next week if Israel agrees to pre-1967 borders, according to a letter found by Reuters on Thursday.

The European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton reportedly said in the letter that Abbas would release a statement as early as next week, if both parties agreed to direct talks. Negotiations would begin before the end of the month.

"In principle, President Abbas should be in a position to give a definite answer by Sunday or early next week," Ashton wrote. "Abbas is very close" to proceeding to direct talks.

The so-called “Quartet” "should help President Abbas rally enough support, both at home and abroad, to engage in direct talks," Ashton reportedly added.



River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

UAE 'Concerned' at German Release of Israeli Murder Suspect

14/08/2010 The United Arab Emirates is concerned over Germany's release of an alleged Israeli agent suspected of links to the January killing of a Hamas leader in Dubai, the foreign ministry said on Saturday.

Abdurahim al-Awadhi, assistant to the foreign minister for legal affairs, expressed "concern that Uri Brodsky has been released on bail and granted the freedom to return to the occupied territories while the case against him continues," in a statement carried by the official WAM news agency.

A German court on Friday released on bail the Israeli agent suspected of links to the killing of Mahmud al-Mabhuh, a leader of the military wing of the Palestinian Resistance movement Hamas.

The Gulf country's foreign ministry "sought clarification today (Saturday) from the German government on the Brodsky case," according to the statement.

Awadhi said that his country "seeks assurances that Brodsky is in no way connected to the murder of Mahmud al-Mabhuh."

"As this may relate to a serious crime committed in Dubai, the UAE expects full and close cooperation from the German authorities and will continue to pursue the matter through diplomatic channels," the foreign ministry said.

Polish authorities arrested Brodsky in June at Warsaw airport before extraditing him to Germany on Thursday on suspicion of illegally obtaining a German passport under the name Michael Bodenheimer that was later found to have been used by a member of the hit squad which killed Mabhuh.

The squad which Dubai police believe was from Israel's spy agency Mossad was found to have used 26 doctored foreign passports, sparking a diplomatic rumpus not only with Germany but also with Australia, Britain, France and Ireland.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Turkey did not invite Israeli ambassador to break fast with foreign ambassadors

[ 14/08/2010 - 11:48 AM ]

ANKARA, (PIC)-- Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reaffirmed that his country will maintain its policy of rapprochement with Mideast nations. “It is intended for us when we look towards the West to turn our backs on the East, and no one has the right to expect this from us,” the premier said.

This came during the fourth annual banquet to break fast in Ramadan hosted by the Justice and Development (AK) Party for politicians, clergy of various denominations, and foreign ambassadors. But this year saw a change when Turkey declined to invite the Israeli ambassador in Ankara, Gabby Levy.

Erdogan said during a speech that Ankara did not “change its axis”, adding that membership in the European Union is a strategic goal and state policy for Turkey, and the current Turkish government advances toward all steps to achieve this historic, strategic objective.

On Turkey’s Eastern policy, Erdogan said: “We want to reach all nations, and no one should be worried about that. We are a global state, and not a tribal state. We have a comprehensive, multifaceted policy, and not a one-dimensional policy.”

On the Palestinian issue, he said: “Turkey will continue to make efforts for a just, constructive, comprehensive solution to the Palestine issue.”

Turning to the Israeli assault on the Marmara ship, he said: “Israel has to recognize its mistake, and apologize and pay compensation, and we will continue to pursue the matter until our demands are met.”

On his behalf, chairman of the AK Party’s foreign relations committee, Ömer Çelik, said: “The reason for not inviting the Israeli ambassador is not on a personal level,” adding that he was not invited to show Turkey’s position condemning the assaults by the Israeli government on the Marmara ship.

He added that “anyone who is unjust or inequitable can not pass the threshold of the Justice and Development party’s headquarters.”

He went on to say that the friendly event, which included Jews, Catholics, and Muslims, “is a symbolic message to the Israeli ambassador.”

The chief rabbi of Turkey Isaac Haliva and the chief of the Jewish community in Turkey, Sami Herman, were among those invited to the event.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hamdan: Releasing the Mossad agent a political collusion

[ 14/08/2010 - 12:05 PM ]

BEIRUT, (PIC)-- Osama Hamdan, the head of international relations in Hamas, has charged that the release of the Mossad agent Uri Brodsky, a suspect in the assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, constituted a political cover for the crime.

Hamdan told Al-Jazeera TV network on Friday that the German court's decision was political par excellence, adding that the German court had thus recorded a precedent of releasing a suspect wanted in an international terror crime and premeditated murder.

He said that releasing Brodsky would allow him to travel to Israel where the issue would be a clear political collusion to cover up for the murder of Mabhouh.

Hamdan affirmed that his movement would not give up the case and would continue to follow it up legally, noting that European human rights groups had expressed readiness to support Hamas and the deceased's family in this issue.

Germany releases suspect in Mabhouh slaying on bail

[ 14/08/2010 - 08:43 AM ]

BERLIN, (PIC)-- German prosecutors Friday let out on bail Mossad agent Uri Brodsky, a suspect in the assassination of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai eight months ago.

Brodsky appeared before a court in Cologne, West Germany, which decided to free him after setting “a suitable bail”, a spokesman for the prosecution said, adding that the court of first instance and the prosecution agreed to indict him for fabricating an official document.

The suspect was extradited to Germany from Poland, where he was arrested June 4 in the Warsaw airport after a warrant for his arrest was issued by Berlin on suspicion of involvement in obtaining a forged German passport and espionage.

Experts say he will be tried only for counterfeiting a passport, a charge which if convicted incurs a punishment of fines and three years in prison.

International criminal law expert Kay Petarz told the French press agency (AFP) that Brodsky cannot be prosecuted in Germany on charges he was not handed over for from Poland, which is falsifying documents.

The case was taken by Cologne prosecution because the counterfeit passport was procured in the city.

According to the German Der Spiegel newspaper, the Mossad agent is accused of taking part in the murder of Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, who was found dead Jan. 20 in a hotel in Dubai.




River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gaza: Swimming Against the Tide

Gaza: Palestinian Swimmers Aim To Make Olympic Dream Come True - Sky News Video Player:

"Aug 8, 2010
Swimming Against the Tide

Tim Marshall reports on the battles facing a group of Palestinian athletes in Gaza who are trying to make their Olympic dreams come true.



- Sent using Google Toolbar"

Palestine Video - A Palestine Vlog

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Shari'ah court head, Jerusalemite figures visit Ma'manullah cemetery

[ 14/08/2010 - 08:58 AM ]

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, (PIC)-- Head of the high Shari'ah court of appeal Ahmed Natour along with other Jerusalemite figures visited the Islamic cemetery of Ma'manullah and witnessed the size of destruction that happened to it after the Israeli occupation authority (IOA) razed more of its graves.

During the visiton Thursday, Natour condemned Israel's violations in the cemetery as an indescribable barbaric act, and pointed out that his court issued a number of fatwas (edicts) which confirmed the sanctity and inviolability of Muslim graves.

He emphasized that Ma'manullah cemetery is a sacred and historical landmark that refers to the Arab and Islamic existence and thus should be protected by all means. He also vowed to work on confronting Israeli violations against the cemetery and re-build its graves again.

The cemetery is the largest in Palestine; there are graves of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) there.

The IOA recently disinterred hundreds of graves in this cemetery for the construction of the controversial museum of tolerance. The planned building is to be financed by the Simon Wiesenthal center, a US-based Zionist group.

Ever since its establishment on usupred Palestinian land more than 62 years ago, Israel started to desecrate Muslim burials in Palestine, exposing and destroying graves, and building parks, museums, hotels, bars, schools and parking lots in their places.


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

SECOND COMING OF THE NAKBA

I4P

Well, well, looks like Obama might get that big pre-election boost after all. You know his ratings are in the tank, the economy is shite and he needs a big-ass Obama miracle, and quickly! He's got to start running his re-election campaign very soon as the teabaggers are arming themselves and the neocons and Repugs are nipping at his ankles. He needs a serious popularity boost, some headlines filled with praise and worship to confirm he IS the the world's hero. Hmmmm what can he do, wave a magic O-wand and repair the world banking crisis and US debt, create immediate jobs for all those Americans, end the two useless wars. No, the "Big O" is looking elsewhere for his "miracle" and me thinks it has something to do with that "Nobel Peace Prize" joke, awarded to him for "future" achievements.

Flashback to July, remember this little ditty?

link
1. U.S. warns Abbas: Direct talks or lose backing for state.

2. An Arab League subcommittee on the Arab peace initiative is expected to support the Palestinian position of continued indirect negotiations with Israel, and not a move toward direct talks.

3.The PA has asked the monitoring committee to recommend allowing the U.S. shuttle diplomacy between Ramallah and Jerusalem run its course until September (Check those calendars, it's almost September folks!)and then consider the PA's future moves.

So there I was checking up on the news regarding the evil rogue state today, and at first glance of reading the "Malarkey" below, thought I found the tooth fairy and Santa Claus instead, BUT, then Satan emerged!! What am I talking about? THIS:

London-based al-Hayat newspaper quotes Ramallah sources as saying prime minister (Netanyahu) has prepared plan for evacuation of 50,000 settlers.

Yeah, I hear you laughing, tooth fairy right? Wrong, now it gets serious there's more, and pay close attention to the part I have made "bold"

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has prepared a "tempting" plan to be presented to the Palestinians in the direct negotiations, as part of which Israel will offer to withdraw from up to 90% of the West Bank, excluding east Jerusalem, the London-based Arabic-language al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper reported Friday.

Listen, can you hear that sound? That's the Whooosh of East Jerusalem going to Israel. And...............this nasty deal won't even be a final one, just merely a wee "agreement" not a "Final Peace Agreement" So the evil rogue state can come back at any time and re-populate all those 50,000 settlers right back into their former homes on Palestinian land. Because, after all, it's only a "temporary" agreement to confiscate the whole of Jerusalem. There's more:

"knowledgeable sources" in Ramallah as saying that the prime minister's plan will be in the form of a new interim agreement, similar to the 1993 Oslo Accords. According to the sources, Netanyahu informed the Western delegates he met with recently that the current situation was not right for reaching a final peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, and that he planned to present a proposal for a new interim agreement, which would be "extensive and tempting" to the Palestinians.

And what about that "Arab League subcommittee" mentioned earlier who were backing Abbas to "not" have talks with Israel? Well Catherine Ashton, the US Quartet member is all over this one:

link Abbas "has requested a few more days for final consultations with Arab partners as well as with the Fatah and PLO executive bodies," Ashton wrote, and "should be in a position to give a definitive answer by Sunday or early next week."

And lastly, what's the plan Stan?

One of the ideas raised by Netanyahu's associates, the sources said, was coming up with a formula linking the future Palestinian state with its temporary borders to Jordan.

And there you have it, Wa Laa, in one fell swoop you have Obama's big-ass miracle and re-election gift, the "future" nobel peace prize thingie, and Isarel is all happy with stealing the whole of Jerusalem, and poor Palestine gets the shaft again. Nakba #2 begins.

Posted by I4P Writers Group at 1:24 PM  

'How a War with Iran Would Diminish American Power'

Via Friday-Lunch-Club

The Compass:

Jennifer Rubin wants a war with Iran:

But the emphasis on the existential threat to Israel ignores a more basic issue for Americans to ponder: a nuclear-armed Iran represents a dagger at the heart of America and an existential threat to our status as a superpower and guarantor of the West’s security....

I would argue that any obligation to present an explanation lies with those whose disastrous policy prescriptions with respect to Iraq lead America into the worst strategic blunder in the country's recent history. That aside, note the blind faith in the power of the military to actually achieve its ends. The recent history in Lebanon is instructive on this point: Israel attacked Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 with an eye toward seriously degrading the group's ability to endanger Israel. And it worked - for a bit. Now, in 2010, Hezbollah is reportedly even better armed than before the war began. And this is a group that relies on outside aid crossing international borders to resupply itself. It can't call on vast oil reserves or the full resources that a state can muster.

Now imagine bombing Iran's nuclear facilities. At best, as with Hezbollah in Lebanon, a wide-ranging attack on Iran would delay its acquisition of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles. But it would surely impress upon Iran the need to redouble its efforts to actually "weaponize" its nuclear program and not merely have the ability to do so when it wants. What's more, any hope that Iran's citizens would look approvingly at the West when they eventually slough off the clerical regime would presumably take a severe hit. We would deal America's long-term prospects with Iran and the Iranian people a damaging blow and still have failed to achieve the ends we desired.

But Rubin makes a more sweeping point, that the U.S. must fight a war to maintain its imperial vanity:

And then there is the broader issue of America’s standing as the sole superpower and the defender of the Free World. Should the “unacceptable” become reality, the notion that America stands between free peoples and despots and provides an umbrella of security for itself and its allies will vanish, just as surely as will the Zionist ideal.

I can't speak for the Zionist ideal, but the concern about America's standing as a sole superpower strikes me as a terrible casus belli. First, it's simply wrong. China, India and Pakistan went nuclear, and America didn't tumble from its superpower perch. Whether or not Iran has one or two crude nuclear bombs has next to no bearing on America's superpower status relative to questions about the health of the American economy.

The second, more fundamental, problem with Rubin's analysis is that a war with Iran would actually accelerate America's fall from super power status. The war with Iraq dealt American power and strategic position a huge blow, with costs that vastly outstripped the gains, but a war with Iran could potentially deal an even greater jolt.

The major failure of the war against Iraq was the inability to articulate - let alone achieve - specific political goals for the post-war environment. We knew we wanted Saddam gone but we didn't know what would take his place or how we'd get from point A to B in post war Iraq. So it is with Iran...... one should be expected to learn from their mistakes, not ignore them.

The U.S. military may know how to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities, but it has demonstrated in two successive military conflicts that it cannot manage the post-war aftermath, let alone put in place political institutions that will serve America's needs ....."

Posted by G, Z, or B at 4:22 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hamdouna: occupation provides meal seven hours before dusk

Hamdouna: occupation provides meal seven hours before dusk

[ 13/08/2010 - 03:45 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)-- Ex-captive Rafat Hamdouna, director of Captives Studies Centre, said that the Israeli occupation prison authority refuses to provide the main meal at sunset, which is the time Muslims break their fast, and denies them performing night prayers in a congregation.

Hamdouna said in a statement on Friday that the Israeli occupation prison authority does not care about the basic needs of the captives during the blessed month of Ramadan and prohibits congregational night prayers even for individual sections.

He said that the prison authority provides a light meal consisting of eggs, jam and cheese while the main meal is served at noon, 7 hours before it is time to break the fast.

Hamdouna added that the situation of the captives is especially harsh in Ramadan and particularly for those who are denied family visits such as captives from the Gaza Strip who have not been visited by their families for more than four years.

He called on all activists and institutions in this field to work towards improving the conditions of the Palestinian captives in occupation jails.

Meanwhile, a statement by the same institution on Friday focused on the special suffering of Palestinian women captives in Israeli occupation jails, especially those who have children and are denied contact with them.



River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Israel response to convoy attack 'typical'

Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:10:34 GMT

Ramzi Baroud

Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian-American journalist and the acclaimed author of books such as My Father Was a Freedom Fighter. Professor Noam Chomsky has lauded his analytical and researching skills as well as his insight into the region, especially as the Editor-in-Chief of the Palestine Chronicle.

The following is the transcription of a Press TV phone interview with Baroud:

Press TV: Thank you Mr. Baroud for joining us. Israeli army chief Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi said today that IDF soldiers were justified in shooting nine activists onboard the Turkish flagship of the Freedom Flotilla. He even commended them for showing restraint and morality. What is your take on the matter?

Baroud: Well this is very much a typical Israeli response to any sort of atrocity that they commit. In fact, if you go back to recent history, after the massacre in the Jenin refugee camp in the West Bank in 2002, this is in fact exactly what they said.

In fact, it was Ashkenazi himself who said that we behaved as the most moral army in the world. After the massacre of civilians in Gaza, this is the term that they also used, with the exact terminology. So it is pretty much predictable, you can always be assured that Israelis are going to commit crimes and that that they will always investigate their crimes, to say that we are a democracy and we do investigate our own actions.

And they always absolve themselves, and they are always behaving morally. So there is absolutely nothing surprising about this whatsoever.

The antagonizing part is that they get away with murder and they get away with that explanation all the time and there is very little that the international community is doing in response.

Press TV: Why isn't the international community ever pushing for more action. Why don't they conduct their own investigations or at least have one representative?

Baroud: In order for a murderer to get away with murder, two things would have to be achieved. First of all the murderer must have absolutely no remorse whatsoever and he has to be very adamant in carrying on with his crime. But the other component, that is very important, is that the international community -- even if there is a will to actually punish Israel for its war crimes - is stopped by the United States.

The Arabs are fragmented and Muslim countries around the world do not have the kind of political leverage that they could manipulate, which they could if they wanted to but they lack the unity and they lack the platform and they lack the political will to in fact translate their solidarity with the Palestinians to any serious actions.

So what ends up happening is that there is always a lot of fury and anger. There are lots of lawyers out there who come and champion the cause and speak of human rights and they quote international law, but at the end of the day, we are always going to hit the same wall.

The problem is the US support of Israel and Israel's adamancy in repeating the same crimes, and the lack of any meaningful platform to actually punish Israel for its crimes.

And until there is a paradigm shift, this same scenario is going to be repeated over and over again.

Press TV: There is also the Israeli side. Two videos are circulating on Youtube; one of them shows four people, four people seemingly activists as it is shot from above, waving their impromptu self-defense gear--wooden and metal bars-- while a group of armed Israeli navy commandos are trying to board the ship.

And in the second one, we see two IDF soldiers beating someone and then shooting them execution-style, fatal shots. Can Israel justify that its soldiers did not use excessive force when the soldiers clearly chose to kill rather than detain?

Baroud: Before we even discuss Israeli justification over using excessive force or not using force at all, there is one question that precedes that question.

And that is: did Israel even have the right in the first place to interfere in the work of activists who are in international waters carrying cement and medicine and wheelchairs to a besieged nation in the Gaza Strip.

There is absolutely no justification for that in the first place. So I feel like if we enter into this kind of foray of trying to explain or understand or even sympathize with Israeli claims or the activists' response, I think we sort of enter into the kind of dilemma that Israel has created out of nothing.

There is actually no dilemma there. Israel should have never interfered in the work of those peace activists in the first place.

Now, whether they used excessive force, I think that the term "excessive force" is also tricky, because if we say that Israel had no right to use excessive force, it is as we are saying that Israel had the right to use force but not in an excessive degree. And I do not think Israel should have been there in the first place, regardless of what they have been saying ever since.

Press TV:But some people are arguing that the ship intended to go to Gaza to break the blockade. But people are saying that Israel supposedly has a right to have stopped the ship?

Baroud: Again we enter into the legal element here; the element of preemption. If you are walking in the street and you see someone who appears suspicious from your point of view do you have the right to attack that person? This is the same issue.

Because we were on the way there, therefore we have the right to...Well we could expand this argument even further. Do they have the right to, say, attack Irish activists in Dublin who are intending to go to Gaza or are thinking of or discussing the possibility of going to Gaza? Based on Israeli preemption rationale, Mossad agents have the right to go and start hitting these activists left and right all over the world, violating international law.

Even then, those activists were not in the process of violating…entering Israeli territorial waters. Absolutely not. They were on their way to Gaza, and the Gazan government, which is democratically elected by the Palestinian people, was really welcoming and ready for these activists to enter into Gaza waters.

Therefore, even based on the preemption logic, also has no right to interfere in the work of these activists.

Press TV: You covered my next question on the issue of the international waters. So Israel seems to be getting away with murder once again with this justification.

Baroud: There is only one way of not allowing Israel to get away with murder, and that is that for us as civil societies and people of conscience around the world not to allow Israel to intimidate us.

Israel will only get away with murder, if we say there is nothing we can do about it; we have tried and we have failed, and several activists got killed. But Israel will lose the moment we carry on with our campaign so the siege on Gaza is broken.

This is the only way that we can prevent this dreadful scenario of Israel getting away with murder from actually happening.

Press TV: Could an international committee be set up which could work for the Palestinian cause, so that their voice is heard in the United Nations?

Baroud: In recent years, I think the work of civil society has advanced very significantly, from ordinary people getting together and trying to do the best they can, to actually reaching out to the various legal bodies…and getting other governments involved, for example I know of Turkey and Iran among others.

This is how we can cross this boundary that separated us from the world and the work of other active societies out there. I think it is very important that we do so.

There is a lot of interest out there and there are a lot of sympathetic governments out there, whether in the Middle East or South America, and others who are in fact playing the role of the political body which is capable of taking the issue to the United Nations and the International Court of Justice, and in fact try to translate this solidarity and the support that the Palestinians have in the civil society into political and legal action.

This is happening, I know. We know of the governments who are ready to do this, Turkey, Iran and others, but also in South America, there is so much solidarity with the Palestinians, whether in Bolivia, Venezuela and others. And they are all ready to play that role. It is so very important that we reach to these governments and allow them to play that role; otherwise the civil society will continue to build solidarity but fail to translate that into any meaningful and political work.

Press TV: Thank you and just one more question. Recently, Ofcom, the British media regulator, rapped Press TV for breaching impartiality rules over an episode of the "Remember Palestine" program, in which Ms. Lauren Booth and her guests discussed the flotilla attack. Do you think it is right to refer to the deadly incident as an Israeli interception instead of an attack? Are "massacre" and "barbarous attack" overstating it? Isn't this a new form of censorship?

Baroud: It is not a new form of censorship. It is the same form of censorship that has been taking place for many years. When the terminology does not suit the taste of the expectation of those in power, it becomes the issue of journalistic integrity and they make a big deal out of it.

But in reality, I am in Washington right now and whenever you turn the TV on, regardless of which TV channel, CNBC, FOX, CNN, the propaganda machine is working day and night.

And there are so little protests out there over the kind of terminology they use and the sort of assumptions that they make and the kinds of terms of reference that they are constantly finding.

But when it comes to Press TV, because of very clear political affiliations they worry about, they try to censor Press TV and they attack Press TV from left and right and these attacks are not going to cease.

I think Lauren Booth is doing a wonderful job and I have been interviewed on her program, and I think it is very morally focused and very morally clear, and that we need to see more of this as opposed to actually try to censor such important programs.

Press TV And the Program's name is “Remember Palestine,” so could one argue that it is not actually biased and is clearly stating what kind of views it is investigating.

Baroud: Of course. In television there so many programs out there that speak in solidarity and in support of various causes and nations. Who are we to come and say to Lauren Booth that you should not have a program that is in solidarity with the Palestinian civilians and try to empower them morally and politically or otherwise? I think it is very hypocritical and very much self-serving. I do not think that we should be in anyway careful and self-censoring so that we do not become victims of such an attack in the future.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian