Saturday 16 June 2018

Is Trump-Kim Deal Really Peace Or Is It A Set Up For War?

June 14, 2018 (Brandon Turbeville – Activist Post) – Presidents Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un are perhaps the two most unpredictable leaders in the world with everyone wondering from day to day what new provocative statement will be ushered from official channels. However, the two most unpredictable leaders appear to have found common ground, perhaps even kindred spirits, during the course of the Singapore Summit when both men came away with an apparent mutually beneficial deal that will see the de-escalation of tensions on the Korean peninsula.

While there have been no real concrete agreements as a result of the talks, the North Korean side has pledged its commitment to the denuclearization of the peninsula, while the American side has strongly suggested that it will put its military exercises on hold with South Korea.
The first step seems to be an agreement for both sides to work toward recovering the remains of Korean war dead and their immediate repatriation.
President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) held a first, historic summit in Singapore on June 12, 2018.

President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un conducted a comprehensive, in-depth and sincere exchange of opinions on the issues related to the establishment of new US-DPRK relations and the building of a lasting and robust peace regime on the Korean Peninsula. President Trump committed to providing security guarantees to the DPRK, and Chairman Kim Jong Un reaffirmed his firm and unwavering commitment to complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

Convinced that the establishment of new US-DPRK relations will contribute to the peace and prosperity of the Korean Peninsula and of the world, and recognizing that mutual confidence building can promote the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, President Trump, and Chairman Kim Jong Un, state the following:

The United States and the DPRK commit to establish new US-DPRK relations in accordance with the desire of the peoples of the two countries for peace and prosperity.

The United States and DPRK will join their efforts to build a lasting and stable peace regime on the Korean Peninsula.

Reaffirming April 27, 2018, Panmunjom Declaration, the DPRK commits to work toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.

The United States and the DPRK commit to recovering POW/MIA remains, including the immediate repatriation of those already identified.

Having acknowledged that the US-DPRK summit — the first in history — was an epochal event of great significance in overcoming decades of tensions and hostilities between the two countries and for the opening up of a new future, President Trump and Chairman Kim Jong Un, commit to implementing the stipulations in the joint statement fully and expeditiously. The United States and the DPRK commit to holding follow-on negotiations, led by the US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, and a relevant high-level DPRK official, at the earliest possible date, to implement the outcomes of the US-DPRK summit.

President Donald J. Trump of the United States of America and Chairman Kim Jong Un of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea have committed to cooperate for the development of new US-DPRK relations and for the promotion of peace, prosperity, and the security of the Korean Peninsula and of the world.

President of the United States of America 
Chairman of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 
June 12, 2018
Sentosa Island
The talks have now concluded with the remainder of the negotiating to take place between Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and his counterpart with some suggesting that the next stage is the freeing of American spies incarcerated in North Korea.
The Reaction From American Political Circles
While Republicans, having never met a war they didn’t like, attempted to keep their rage at the idea of peace under control, many like chicken hawk Lindsey Graham appeared on national media to tone down praise of Trump and warn against showing weakness and removing troops from one of America’s many war zones. Essentially, they are arguing that America should dictate the terms, Kim should agree, and there should be no American concessions of any value.
Democrats, however, have predictably been frothing at the mouth at even the idea of peace, particularly a peace negotiated by “literally Hitler” himself, Donald Trump. These warmongers and psychotics have railed against even talking to Kim Jong Un, claiming that there should be no peace whatsoever with a nation that has such horrible human rights violations, as if the United States has not racked up enough of those same violations of its own. These critics complain that Trump is engaging in “appeasement” of some kind which seems impossible to explain to anyone using logic or who is restrained by reality.
But what is actually happening with this summit? Is it a true and genuine desire for peace or is it just cover for the next war to take shape over the next several years?
The Potential Positive
It is difficult for any genuine anti-war activist to oppose the recent talks between the United States and North Korea. After decades of technical war, threats to “obliterate” North Korea, constant nuclear tests, repeatedly provocative war games, innumerable threats against one another, not to mention the tension between South and North Korea, two countries that have long wanted to talk to one another, the fact that tensions seem to be easing can scarcely be considered a bad thing.
While it is unfair that the United States and its “allies” can maintain nuclear weapons stockpiles as they march across the globe slaughtering innocent people while other countries cannot, an end to nuclear proliferation (across the board) is also desirable. If both countries can come to an agreement to, at the very least, stop provoking one another, America will have taken a greater step toward peace in Singapore than it has in decades.
For all their public appearances, both Trump and Kim have appeared legitimately happy at the results of the meeting and both have expressed high hopes for the future. Trump even went so far as to tweet that the “nuclear threat” from North Korea no longer existed. But is there more to the deal than just a desire for peace?
Despite America’s desire for war or, at least the appearance of potential war, both Koreas have expressed a desire to not only talk but to reunifyIn an historic meeting in April, 2018, the presidents of North and South Korea met and agreed to remove nuclear weapons from the Korean peninsula and begin negotiating an end to the Korean war. Despite the influence of the United States on South Korea and the human rights nightmare of North Korea, it still remains clear that both Koreas have an interest in ending the war, bringing about peace, and perhaps moving forward with integration.
While it may publicly appear that the recent US/NK peace deal was a mutual desire between both parties to de-escalate and move towards peace, some analysts question whether or not that is the case and posit that the deal may have actually been made as a strategy of last resort on the part of the North Koreans.
As Andrew Korybko writes for Eurasia Future in his article, “The Trump-Kim Deal Is The First Example Of The ‘New Washington Consensus’,
As it currently stands, China has monopolized a large chunk of its neighbor’s economy, not out of any malicious or neo-imperial intentions but simply because it’s been the only lifeline to the “Hermit Kingdom” since the Soviet Union collapsed and Moscow cut off all of its previous aid to the country. For all practical intents and purposes, China controls the North Korean economy, an open secret that’s known to even the most casual observers even if it’s “politically incorrect” to publicly say and is regularly denied by Beijing. The never-ending international sanctions had the effect of scaring off most other investors, and Russia entered the game way too late in the past couple of years to make any tangible difference. Moreover, by the time that Moscow got interested in North Korea’s economic potential as a transit stateconnecting the investment-hungry but energy-rich Far East region with cash-flush but energy-poor South Korea, international sanctions became tighter, and Russia itself also signed onto them together with China.
The cumulative effect of this latest development, particularly in terms of China’s honest participation in the latest round of sanctions (for reasons related to its unease at having a nuclear-armed neighbor play the “useful idiot” in bringing American anti-missile infrastructure closer to its borders), was that North Korea had little choice other than to negotiate with the US and reconsider its nuclear capabilities. Faced with the real fear of experiencing another nationwide famine such as the one that reportedly struck the country in the 1990s, Chairman Kim’s immediate interests were purely economic, and he painfully came to perceive of his “big brother” in the north as a Great Power who isn’t above playing political games in pursuit of its self-interests. In China’s defense, its global strategy of multipolarity was being endangered by what it considered to be Kim’s recklessness in engaging in so many nuclear and missile tests, but regardless, the bonds of trust were irrevocably broken between these two.That, however, doesn’t mean that North Korea regards China as an “enemy”, but just that the young Kim had a rude awakening in terms of how the real world works, learning first-hand that slogans of ideological solidarity about a shared “communist struggle” don’t compensate for his country’s disadvantageous position as a pawn on the Hyper-Realist “19th-Century Great Power Chessboard”. Disheartened by this realization and likely feeling some natural resentment towards his former benefactors, Kim decided to enter into unprecedented denuclearization talks with the US, though prudently taking care to involve China in all manner of his consultations so as not to inadvertently make an actual enemy out of it given how easily this very sensitive situation could have turned into a fast-moving security dilemma between Pyongyang and Beijing had he not had the wisdom to do so. Seeking sanctions relief and a “counterbalance” to China, Kim ultimately agreed to the Singapore Summit with Trump.

Having predictably been briefed on the psychological-economic factors that drove Kim to come to the Singapore Summit and in all likelihood agree beforehand on what the outcome of this historic event would be, Trump came to the event with the fullest of confidence but also with a secret ace up his sleeve to sweeten the deal that he was about to publicly clinch with his counterpart. It’s now been revealed that Trump showed Kim a Hollywood-style four-minute video extolling the economic and developmental benefits that North Korea could receive if its Chairman chooses the right path at this once-in-a-lifetime crossroad that the film dramatically hints he was fated to appear at. Evidently, Kim must have really enjoyed the promising message that was conveyed because all of his body language immediately after his private viewing of this film with Trump during their one-on-one meeting was exceptionally positive and radiated happiness, sincerity, and confidence as he agreed to advance his country’s denuclearization.
In an interview with Tasnim News Agency, Korybko also stated that
After all, North Korea already blew up its only nuclear testing site, and its leader raced to win back Trump’s approval for the Singapore Summit instead of the reverse. This implies that the US is negotiating from a position of strength while North Korea is doing so from weakness, showing which of the two wants denuclearization to happen more. The lesson that both parties learned is that their highest representatives need to watch their words in order to not provoke either side into responding with anything dramatic as a means of saving their reputations, thereby potentially endangering the forthcoming talks and complicating North Korea’s strategic surrender to the US in exchange for promised aid and investment.
So the question is whether or not the North Korean side felt it had no other option than to move forward with a political deal, much like the Iran deal, in order to save face and survive. After all, it is not reasonable to require North Korea to disarm from its only real deterrent while the its enemy who has been breathing down its neck for the last several decades simply promises not to attack it.
A more important question, however, is whether or not the United States is negotiating in good faith or whether this new “deal” is just another “Iran deal” to feign an effort for peace while preparing for and even initiating war.
The “Libya Model”
Given that the United States has done nothing with its foreign policy but conduct illegal imperialist wars against sovereign countries that provided no threat to it now for decades, the concept that the United States is negotiating in good faith is hard to believe. It is particularly hard to believe when the United States had only recently engaged in epic harassment – politically, diplomatically, and militarily – against North Korea. Even more so, when the National Security Advisor and repeated war criminal John Bolton, stated plainly to FOX News Sunday that “We have very much in mind the Libya model from 2003, 2004.”
Libya negotiated in good faith with the Bush administration and eliminated its nuclear weapons. Seven years later, the country found itself on the wrong end of a U.S. backed destabilization effort which soon became a proxy war and quickly became a NATO invasion. The result? Libya was left in absolute shambles where it remains to this day. Race slavery was instituted by some of the many Islamic fundamentalist militias supported by the United States to overthrow Ghaddafi who was himself sodomized by a bayonet and executed on camera. Bolton elaborated further on the “Libya Model” reference on CBS’ Face The Nation where he stated,
In the case of Libya, for example—and it’s a different situation in some respects—those negotiations were carried out in private. They were not known publicly. But one thing that Libya did that that led us to overcome our skepticism was that they allowed American and British observers into all their nuclear-related sites. So, it wasn’t a question of relying on international mechanisms. We saw them in ways we have never seen before.
Notably, the North Korea talks are taking place in public even if they aren’t being met with high praise.
Interestingly enough, Kim Jong Un seems to have a clear understanding of why giving up one’s nuclear weapons is a bad idea, particularly when it comes to the United States. In 2011, as Libya sunk under the waves of chaos, Kim stated that Ghaddafi’s decision to give up his nuclear weapons was a mistake. A North Korean Foreign Ministry official also described the “de-nuclearization” process as “an invasion tactic to disarm the country.” The official also stated that the “Libyan model” touted by Bolton was proof that North Korea’s strategy was the right one and that nuclear weapons was the only way to keep peace on the peninsula.
Surely, Kim Jong Un has not forgotten his own wisdom in terms of dealing with the United States. After all, there is little difference between dealing with a Bush, Obama, or Trump administration.
On the other hand, even seasoned leaders like Ghaddafi fell prey to deception and false promises of the U.S. For this reason, it cannot be ignored that one possibility as to why the United States seems so interested in peace at this point is related to removing Kim’s nuclear deterrent.
The Iran Deal Precedent
On Tuesday, May 8, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States will be pulling out of the “Iran Nuclear Deal” which was struck under the Obama administration, a deal that he repeatedly called a “bad deal” and even “the single worst deal I’ve ever seen drawn by anybody.”
“The so-called Iran deal was supposed to protect the United States and our allies from the lunacy of an Iranian nuclear bomb, a weapon that will only endanger the survival of the Iranian regime,” President Trump said. “In fact, the deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and over time reach the brink of a nuclear breakout.”
He added that “Today, we have definitive proof that this Iranian promise was a lie.”
Yet there was absolutely no evidence to back Trump up on his claims. Even Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and the Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats have stated that Iran is living up to its commitments. Still, Trump has argued in the past that, while Iran may be sticking to its commitments, it is violating the “spirit” of the agreement by “fostering discord” in the region.
This is highly ironic considering that the United States is the single biggest fosterer of discord in the Middle East alongside Israel. It’s also false that Iran is “fostering discord” and that it is not living up to its end of the deal. It should also be pointed out that Iran was doing nothing wrong in terms of its nuclear program before the deal and should never have been bullied into signing it to begin with.
Now, a sovereign country who has a right to pursue a nuclear energy program is being told by aggressive nuclear states that it cannot be allowed to be armed in the same manner, develop an adequate energy program, or defend itself against the aggression of the very states marching across the region and repeatedly stating their desire to overthrow, destabilize, or invade Iran.
But while this move may have come as a shock to some, it shouldn’t have. After all, the Iran deal itself was nothing more than the first step in the coming war on Iran. This can be seen clearly in the pages of the corporate-financier think tanks who develop and present US foreign and domestic policy. For instance, the Brookings Institution, as Tony Cartalucci writes, “whose corporate-financier sponsors include arms manufacturers Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon, energy giants Exxon Mobil, BP, Aramco, and Chevron, and financiers including Bank of America, Citi, and numerous advisers and trustees provided by Goldman Sachs,” wrote in 2009 of the plan to use just such a “deal” to then justify military action against Iran.
The Brookings Institution Report – Which Path To Persia?

The plan for a Western or a Western/Israeli attack on Iran, along with the theatre of alleged US-Israeli tensions leading up to a strike and outright war, has been in the works for some time. For instance, in 2009, the Brookings Institution, a major banking, corporate, and military-industrial firm, released a report entitled “Which Path To Persia? Options For A New American Strategy For Iran,” in which the authors mapped out a plan which leaves no doubt as to the ultimate desire from the Western financier, corporate, and governing classes.
The plan involves the description of a number of waysthe Western oligarchy would be able to destroy Iran including outright military invasion and occupation. However, the report attempts to outline a number of methods that might possibly be implemented before direct military invasion would be necessary. The plan included attempting to foment destabilization inside Iran via the color revolution apparatus, violent unrest, proxy terrorism, and “limited airstrikes” conducted by the US, Israel or both.Interestingly enough, the report states that any action taken against Iran must be done after the idea that Iran has rejected a fair and generous offer by the West has been disseminated throughout the general public. The report reads,
…any military operation against Iran will likely be very unpopular around the world and require the proper international context— both to ensure the logistical support the operation would require and to minimize the blowback from it. The best way to minimize international opprobrium and maximize support (however, grudging or covert) is to strike only when there is a widespread conviction that the Iranians were given but then rejected a superb offer—one so good that only a regime determined to acquire nuclear weapons and acquire them for the wrong reasons would turn it down. Under those circumstances, the United States (or Israel) could portray its operations as taken in sorrow, not anger, and at least some in the international community would conclude that the Iranians “brought it on themselves” by refusing a very good deal.
From the writings of Brookings, it is readily apparent for all to see what the latest browbeating over the “terrible” Iran deal and how the Iranians are not living up to their obligations under the agreement coming from the Trump administration are all about. The United States has bullied Iran into accepting a deal it should never have had to agree to in the first place and now the U.S. is attempting to add restrictions and obligations that were never part of the deal to begin with and/or claim that Iran is not living up to its end of the deal. If Iran can be represented as having been uncooperative, Iran will be painted as having refused “a very good deal.”
As the report states, any action taken against Iran must be done after the idea that Iran has rejected a fair and generous offer by the West has been disseminated throughout the general public. For that reason, the idea is being promulgated that Iran was offered a great deal at the disadvantage of the United States but Iran would not abide by even this agreement, continuing to insist on gaining nuclear weapons to destroy the U.S. and poor innocent Israel, forcing America’s hand after diplomacy failed.
Ironically, it is admitted by the authors of the report that the Iranians are not governed by lunatics intent on nuking the world but by entirely rational players. Still, they move forward with a number of options for attacking Iran. It should thus be obvious to anyone reading this report that the US, NATO, and Israel are uninterested in peace with Iran and are entirely focused on war and Iranian destruction.
“The so-called ‘Iran deal,’ introduced during the administration of US President Barack Obama, represents precisely this “superb offer,” with Flynn’s accusations serving as the “turn down” ahead of the “sorrowful” war and attempted regime change the US had always planned to target Tehran with,” writes Tony Cartalucci of Land Destroyer Report.
The report continues to discuss the citations that could be used for an attack on Iran, clearly stating its intentions to create a plan to goad a non-threatening nation into war. It states,
The truth is that these all would be challenging cases to make. For that reason, it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.)
While steps toward peace should be lauded, we must be sure these steps are actually being taken toward peace and not to another “Libya Model.” North Korea may want to re-enter the world at large but it must not do so if the end result will be the destruction of the country yet again. Since Kim Jong Un already has nuclear weapons and the ability to deliver them, he has significant bargaining power in any negotiation. Upon giving those weapons up, however, he will have placed North Korea in a precarious position. It may be too early to tell as of yet what will be the result of the Trump-Kim agreement but, for now, those who truly desire peace must keep a watchful and skeptical eye open.
Brandon Turbeville writes for Activist Post – article archive here – He is the author of seven books,Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions andDispatches From a Dissident, volume 1 and volume 2The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria, The Difference it Makes: 36 Reasons Why Hillary Clinton Should Never Be President, and Resisting The Empire: The Plan To Destroy Syria And How The Future Of The World Depends On The Outcome. Turbeville has published over 1000 articles on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s radio show Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV. His website is He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at)

This article may be freely shared in part or in full with author attribution and source link.
Support us at Patreon. Follow us on FacebookTwitterSteemit, and BitChute. Ready for solutions? Subscribe to our premium newsletter Counter Markets.

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 the Blog!

PA forces crackdown on Gaza solidarity rally in Ramallah

The Palestinian Authority’s (PA) security forces broke up a rally in support of Gaza, which took place in Ramallah on Wednesday. Riot police used batons, sound grenades and tear gas to disperse the demonstrators. Injuries and arrests were reported at the scene. The protest was held despite a temporary ban on demonstrations issued earlier on Wednesday. Organisers have promised further rallies. Protesters have been calling on PA leader Mahmoud Abbas to drop measures against Gaza, which they believe punish its two million residents.
Related Videos

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 the Blog!

Friday 15 June 2018

الجنوب السوري للتحرير «وإسرائيل» تترنّح على صفيح الجولان…!

يونيو 13, 2018

محمد صادق الحسيني

الهجوم النهائي لقوات حلف المقاومة على مواقع المسلحين الإرهابيين في أرياف القنيطرة ودرعا، وصولاً إلى حدود الجولان وما بعد بعد حدود الجولان والحدود الأردنية بات قاب قوسين أو أدنى…!

في هذه الأثناء تلقى رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي ووزير حربه رسالة سرية نقلت إليهما بواسطة الطرف الروسي، تضمّنت تحذيراً شديد اللهجة لـ»إسرائيل» من التدخل، بأيّ شكل من الأشكال في المعارك المقبلة، وإلا فإنّ الردّ لقوات حلف المقاومة على أي استفزاز «إسرائيلي» سيكون أقسى بكثير مما يتوقعه العدو…!

في هذه الأثناء، فإنه وعلى الرغم من عاصفة الضجيج التي يثيرها رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي، في تناغم مع تصريحات تصدر على الموجة نفسها من الجنرالات العسكريين والأمنيين الأميركيين، حول العديد من المواضيع المتعلقة بالعدوان الأميركي الإسرائيلي الرجعي «العربي» على سورية، فإنّ انتصارات الجيش السوري وحلفائه مستمرة على كلّ الجبهات متجاهلة كلّ التهديد والعويل الأميركي الإسرائيلي السعودي والذي يتمحور حول ما يطلقون عليه «توسّع النفوذ الإيراني» في سورية وغيرها من الدول العربية.

ولكن عاصفة الضجيج هذه لم تتمكن من إخفاء الهزائم المتلاحقة التي يتكبّدها المعسكر الصهيوأميركي المعادي لحلف المقاومة، ولا هي قادرة على تهدئة روع القادة العسكريين والأمنيين والسياسيين الإسرائيليين الذين انتقلوا الى القدس المحتلة، لعقد اجتماعاتهم في النفق أو مركز القيادة المحصّن ضدّ كلّ أنواع الأسلحة والمُقام في باطن الأرض عند المداخل الغربية لمدينة القدس، وذلك منذ بداية شهر أيار الماضي.

فكيف لنتن ياهو، الذي يهدّد بإخراج إيران من كلّ سورية وليس فقط من الجنوب السوري، ويهدّد بضرب الجيش السوري، أن يكون رامبو في الإعلام ويختبئ تحت الأرض في الوقت نفسه خوفاً من صواريخ الجيش السوري وحلفائه!؟

إنّ هذا الواقع يؤكد مجدّداً هزيمتكم الميدانية أيها الصهاينة وكذلك هزال المعنويات الداخلية والتي تجعلكم تعيشون حالة خوف دائم، والتي تعزّزت بعد المستجدات التالية:

أولاً: فشل الاجتماع، الذي عُقد بين رئيس أركان الجيش الروسي، الجنرال فاليري غيراسيموف، ورئيس هيئة الأركان المشتركة للجيوش الأميركية، الجنرال جوزيف دانفورد، والذي عقد يوم 8/6/2018 في هلسنكي، عاصمة فنلندا، في التوصل الى أيّ صيغة مشتركة، بين الطرفين، لانتشار الجيش السوري في جنوب سورية، وكذلك موضوع تمركز وحدات مقاتلة من حزب الله إلى جانب مستشارين عسكريين إيرانيين، يدّعي الطرف الأميركي الإسرائيلي أنهم ليسوا كذلك وإنما هناك وحدات من الحرس الثوري الإيراني تنتشر مع وحدات الجيش السوري ويرتدي أفرادها اللباس العسكري السوري للفرقة الرابعة والخامسة وقوات الحرس الجمهوري السوري، حسب «المعلومات الاستخبارية» التي تحدّث عنها الجنرال الأميركي خلال الاجتماع. وهي بالطبع معلومات ملفقة سبق أن نفى صحتها الرئيس السوري بشارالأسد شخصياً، بالإضافة الى وزير الخارجية وليد المعلم.

وهذا يعني:

 ـ أنّ الطرف الروسي رفض الاقتناع بما ساقه الطرف الأميركي من تلفيقات حول طبيعة القوات العسكرية المنتشرة في الجنوب السوري، خاصة أنّ القيادة الروسية على علم تام، بحكم التنسيق الدقيق بين القيادتين الروسية والسورية، بكافة التفاصيل العسكرية المتعلقة بمختلف الجبهات السورية، وبالتالي فهي على وعي كامل بأنّ ما طرحه الجنرال الأميركي ليس الا تخرّصات وخرافات.

 ـ رفض الجانب الروسي التدخل في قرار سيادي سوري بحت أو مناقشته او الموافقة على تدخل الطرف الأميركي «الإسرائيلي» في ذلك، واعتبار الموضوع خارج نطاق البحث، ما يعني رفضاً روسياً واضحاً لابتزازات الطرف، الأميركي الإسرائيلي المهزوم، ودحضاً لادّعاءات نتن ياهو وغيره أنّ هناك خلافاً روسياً ـ إيرانياً حول المشاركة العسكرية الإيرانية في صدّ العدوان الذي تتعرّض له سورية منذ ما يزيد على سبع سنوات.

ثانياً: فشل تصريحات وزير الحرب الأميركي، الجنرال جيمس ماثيس، التي أدلى بها على هامش اجتماعات وزراء دفاع حلف شمال الأطلسي في بروكسل يوم 9/6/2018، في تهدئة روع الإسرائيليين وتخفيف شعور قيادتهم السياسية والعسكرية بالهزيمة واقتراب موعد استعادة الجولان السوري المحتلّ وصلاة قوات حلف المقاومة قريباً في المسجد الأقصى المبارك.

تلك التصريحات التي قال فيها الوزير الأميركي بأنّ ما يُطلق عليه التحالف الدولي لمحاربة الإرهاب سيستمرّ في محاربة داعش، وأنّ القوات والقواعد الأميركية باقية في سورية حتى إلحاق الهزيمة الكاملة بداعش، أيّ أنه يقول للإسرائيليين بصريح العبارة إننا باقون لحمايتكم ولا داعي لقلقكم.

ولكن الوزير الأميركي يعلم أكثر من غيره، كما يعلم الجنرالات العسكريون والأمنيون الإسرائيليون، أنّ كلامه بعيد عن الواقع، وأنه غير قادر على الحفاظ لا على قواعده العسكرية الاحتلالية في سورية، ولا على توفير الأمن لقاعدته العسكرية على أرض فلسطين والتي تسمّى «إسرائيل»، وانّ مَن يحدّد بقاء القوات غير السورية على التراب الوطني السوري هو القيادة السياسية السورية، ممثلة بشخص الرئيس بشار الأسد، بصفته القائد الأعلى للقوات المسلحة السورية، والذي ينطلق قراره من موازين القوى في الميدان والوسائل القتالية اللازمة لإنهاء الوجود الإرهابي المسلح والمدعوم من قوات وقواعد الاحتلال الأميركية في التنف والحسكة وغيرها من مناطق الشمال الشرقي السوري.

ثالثاً: أنّ الخزعبلات والتفاهات والتضليلات، التي تصدر عن هذا المهرّج المسمّى بنيامين نتن ياهو، والتي كان آخرها ما صدر عنه عصر يوم 10/6/2018 من ادّعاءات بأنّ «إسرائيل» متفوّقة في مجال تنقية المياه ومواجهة الجفاف وأنها مستعدة لتقديم العون التكنولوجي للشعب الإيراني لمساعدته في تنقية المياه ومواجهة شحّها في إيران…!

وبأقواله هذه فإنّ نتن ياهو لا يمارس الخديعة على الشعب الإيراني فقط، وإنما يمارس الكذب على كلّ شعوب العالم بادّعاءاته هذه وإنكاره أنّ تخفيف أزمة المياه في فلسطين المحتلة لا يرجع إلى عبقرياته واختراعاته التكنولوجية والمائية الهيدروليكية وانما يعود ذلك، وبكلّ بساطة، الى سرقة المياه الفلسطينية الأردنية السورية اللبنانية من نهر الأردن وروافده ومن بحيرة طبريا الفلسطينية السورية. وهو ما نجم عنه جفاف نصف البحر الميت الجنوبي، الذي كان يتغذّى بالمياه من نهر الأردن، الذي لم يعد نهراً بعد تحويل مجراه وسرقة مياهه من قبل أسلاف نتن ياهو.

لذلك، فإننا نقول له إنّ الشعب الإيراني الذي يمتلك آلاف العلماء، في كافة مجالات العلوم بما فيها العلوم النووية، ليس بحاجة لك ولا لأكاذيبك وادّعاءاتك الزائفة. كما أنّ هذه الترّهات لن تنجح في تهدئة روعك أنت وقيادتك العسكرية والأمنية وليست قادرة على إعادة الطمأنينة الى قلوب المستوطنين الإسرائيليين.

رابعاً: استدعاء وزارة الحرب الإسرائيلية، وبشكل عاجل، جنود الاحتياط لترك بيوتهم ومراكز عملهم والالتحاق بالجبهة فوراً، وذلك عقب ما قالت عنه مصادر عسكرية إسرائيلية إنه اقتراب بدء هحوم الجيش السوري وحلفائه على جبهتي القنيطرة ودرعا في الجنوب السوري، ذلك الاستدعاء، وحسب بيانات وزارة الحرب الإسرائيلية، الذي يهدف الى عرقلة الهجوم السوري إذا لم يكن ممكناً احتواؤه…!

مما يعني أنّ قيادة جيشك، أيّها الطاووس الأجوف، لم تعُد تواجه خطر تقدّم قوات حلف المقاومة لتحرير الجليل الأعلى من الاحتلال، وإنما أصبحت تواجه جبهة تشمل مستوطنات وسط الجولان، مثل مستوطنة ميروم جولانMerom Golan، ومستوطنات جنوب الجولان مثل مستوطنة ميفو حمه Mevo Hama ومستوطنة تل كاتسرين TEL Katsrin، وكذلك مستوطنات جنوب غرب بحيرة طبريا مثل مستوطنة دجانيا الف Deganya Alef ومستوطنة دجانيا باء Deganya Bet، وغيرها من المستوطنات الواقعة في تلك المنطقة وصولاً الى مدينة بيسان وغيرها من المدن الفلسطينية المحتلة، جنوب بحيرة طبريا وغربها.

وهذا يعني أنّ حديث مستوطنيك، على طول خطوط المواجهه، لن يدور حول ما أطلقته من بروباغندا تضليلية فارغة حول شحّ المياه في إيران، وإنما سيدور حديثهم في مستوطنات وسط الجولان حول ما إذا كانت القوات السورية، التي ستدخل المستوطنات وتحرّرها من جيشك، هل ستكون هذه القوات من الفرقة المدرعة الرابعة في الجيش السوري أم من وحدات حزب الله؟

بينما سيدور حديث مستوطنيك في مستوطنات جنوب الجولان وجنوب غرب بحيرة طبريا حول ما إذا كانت القوات، التي ستدخل المستوطنات وتحرّرها من احتلالكم، ستكون من الحرس الجمهوري السوري فقط أم أنها ستشمل أيضاً قوات النمر المعزّزة بوحدات من الفرقة المدرّعة الخامسة في الجيش السوري ووحدات من لواء أبو الفضل العباس في قوات الدفاع الوطني السوري؟

هذه ستكون محاور حديث أولئك المستوطنين الذين تقوم بخداعهم وتعرّضهم لأخطار الحروب والدمار. كما أنّ ما يطلبونه منك ليس حلّ مشكلة المياه في إيران وانما إيجاد مأوى لهم عندما تعترف بهزيمتك ويبدأ تفكيك «إسرائيل» بعد تحرير معظم فلسطين التاريخية من قبل قوات حلف المقاومة وعودة أهلها الفلسطينيين إلى ديارهم التي هجّروا منها قبل سبعين عاماً.

كفّوا عن الكذب والخداع واعترفوا بهزيمتكم وابدأوا بتنظيم انسحابكم المنظم من فلسطين قبل اضطراركم إلى الانسحاب تحت النار، الأمر الذي سيضاعف خسائر «جبهتكم الداخلية» عشرات المرات.

بعدنا طيّبين، قولوا الله…

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 the Blog!

Thursday 14 June 2018

Hassan Nasrallah on Israeli Warmongering & US Sanctions: Hezbollah Stronger than Ever, Resistance Not For Sale

June 10, 2018
Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Sayed Hassan Nasrallah on May 25, 2018, on the occasion of the commemoration of the 18th anniversary of the Liberation of Lebanon.
Videos here
In Any Upcoming War, Hezbollah will Surely Defeat Israel […] Despite all the intimidation, all the threats, all the blockades, (despite the inscriptions on the) lists of terrorist organizations, the (campaigns of) defamation, all these efforts (to weaken Hezbollah and diminish its popularity in Lebanon) have been in vain. Therefore, we have a community, a people who, prior to 2000, were worthy of victory, and that is why God granted us victory (on May 25, 2000), and He gave us the victory of 2006, and we remain, by the grace of God, the strongest and the most glorious, because we are worthy of it.
Myself, personally, when I talk about the future … Of course, we always say that we do not rush to war, but we do not fear it. The (Israeli) enemy is always threatening, promising, erupting, (trying to) terrorize us, but when we talk about the possibility of a war (against Israel) – may God take this perspective away from this country and this region –, whether during internal meetings or other, I speak of our victory with certainty, because God, with whom we were and with whom we still are, stands by our side. He never left us nor abandoned us, because our people, our community, our Resistance, are there and are worthy to be granted victory by God, the Most High and the Exalted. This is the fundamental point of strength on which we base ourselves and rely. […]
Resistance in Lebanon and Palestine Not For Sale
(First, the US are exerting) pressure on our popular base to punish it (for its support for Hezbollah), psychological, moral, financial, economic pressures, meant to dislocate, reduce and weaken it.
Second, (there is pressure on) our friends and allies to scare them and induce them to distance themselves (from us), because of fears (of sanctions).Third, and this is the fundamental and most important goal, (these sanctions are intended to) cut our funding sources, what they refer to as the drying up of the funding sources of Hezbollah, of the Resistance in Lebanon and of the Resistance movements in the region. But this is not something new, they work at it since 1990. We are on the list of terrorist organizations since the 1990s. It is in order to dry our funding sources that continuous pressure is exerted against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is our main support. And that is a mark of honor for the Islamic Republic of Iran, this gives it a high rank and status.
Today, what is the US problem with Iran? You’ve seen the 12 demands of the US Secretary of State (Mike Pompeo) for them to reconsider their relations with Iran. Among the 12 demands… What do they really want from Iran? That it becomes a weak country, without missiles, without civil nuclear power, excluded of the Middle East’s (issues), that takes no responsibilities and has no involvment nor influence at the regional level, that it becomes, like many countries, an enslaved country. That if (Washington) requires (Iran) 100 billion, they would pay it cash. If (Washington) wants to appoint or depose a President, a King or a Prince, (Iran) would comply at once. That’s what they want from Iran. That’s what they did in Iran at the time of the Shah.
Anyway, among the US demands, there is cessation of support to Resistance movements that (Washington) characterizes as terrorist. And (Pompeo) mentioned Hezbollah and Palestinian Resistance movements. Thus, one reason of these pressures against Iran is that it assumes (the responsibility of Resistance to Israel).
Likewise, (the sanctions) are pressuring any contributor or benefactor who can bring money or donations to this Resistance, its organizations, its (families of) martyrs, its wounded, its orphans, its Resistants, its infrastructure, its capacity… This is their goal (to dry any financial support for Hezbollah).
This is part of the struggle. I do not mean just to describe its aspects, but also to determine our responsibility (against these measures). They are part of the confrontation, of the current battle. And we, psychologically, have to understand (the goals of) our enemy and realize that this is part of the current struggle.
It goes without saying that when the Resistance in Lebanon stood since 1982 and proclaimed its rejection of continued Israeli occupation of Lebanon –which is also a US occupation–, its rejection of the American-Zionist project in Lebanon, either as an occupation, or the imposition of political control, policy management or peace agreements with the enemy… (When) we reject this and struggle, fight and sacrifice, and inflict a defeat on this enemy… When Israel is the primary project for the United States and its military forward base in the region, and that you cross their path, confront them and defeat the army (reputed) invincible, when you humble and expel it from your territory, humiliated, defeated, running (for their lives)… When you cause a strategic turning point in the Arab-Israeli struggle because of what happened in 2000, with its repercussions inside occupied Palestine and the launch of the Intifada… When you are responsible for a huge cultural transformation in the region… When you face the American project, as happened again in 2006, the new Middle East project which, according to Condoleeza Rice, was being born before our eyes… When you raise against the US-Israeli projects and contribute to their collapse –I do not pretend that we have ruined them alone, but we helped to make them fall to some extent, according to places, battlefields and countries… When you are a force that denies US and Israeli hegemony over Palestine, in Lebanon and the countries of the region… When you are a force demanding your rights to sovereignty, authentic sovereignty, not sovereignty as a slogan (devoid of reality)… Every day, the Israeli enemy violates our airspace. Yesterday, it hit Syria from Lebanese skies. Where are the (pseudo) sovereignists? (I mean genuine) sovereignty! When you are a force that demands and truly work for the sovereignty, freedom, liberation (of your territory), for its independent decision, not submitting to the United States or anyone else in this world, (when you claim) that the people of each country is sovereign at home, and must take decisions by its own in his country… When you do not allow neither the US nor Israel to put their hands over a (single) inch of your territory at the border, or one (single) cubic meter of your (territorial) waters, or a (single) drop of your oil, it is natural that this enemy will see the threat (you represent for him), for its projects, for its hegemony, for its interests, (because you are) a force that defends your people, your nation and your Community and it will not sit idle in front of you. It will (try to) fight you, kill you, launch wars against you, it will plot against you, etc., etc., etc. Then from there, it will submit you to an economic and financial blockade, (put you on) the list of terrorist organizations, dry your funding sources, etc. So that’s (a full) part of the struggle.
And those of our brothers, among our noble families, merchants, businesses, organizations, associations, affected by (the sanctions), they must consider the damage as part of the struggle. This is exactly the same as for the family that offers a martyr, who has an injured or a partial or total paralysis, who sees their house bombed during the war and who ends up in a camp. In the same way, this is part of the sacrifices required by this battle, and those affected and disabled (by sanctions and inscription on the list of terrorist organizations) must consider this damage, firstly at the personal and psychological level, as part of the sacrifices (required), we have to consider this as part of the sacrifices on the path (of Resistance) that we took, we must consider that this is part of the battle and face it.How to cope with it? In order to face (these measures), the essential point, as we have said in some (previous) battles, is to defeat the purpose (of sanctions). We cannot respond to these inscriptions on the list of terrorist organizations (and the resulting sanctions) by similar measures, because we have neither banks nor US currency, nor do we exchange dollar, euro or any such thing. But we have to frustrate their purpose. What is it? Their goal is to shake our resolve, the determination of our people and our popular base. They want to engage our will, our determination and our resolve, our perseverance and persistence on this path, on this line and on this position. As long as we remain resolute, determined and steadfast, (their sanctions) have no weight. And may God make the best out of it.
True, there will be damage, we will suffer losses, but this is part of the required sacrifices, like the martyrs, the wounded, demolished homes and factories that were destroyed during the war. After that, God the Almighty and the Exalted compensated, international assistance helped rebuild, the State assumed its share of responsibility, we took our responsibility, but it’s part of the path (of Resistance we chose).
So far, the experience showed (our enemies) that death, murder, wars, massacres, destruction, refugees, and all that was inflicted on us, to us and to our people in Lebanon, in no way diminished our commitment, our resolve and our determination. And therefore, now, I say that these measures will lead to no result. They do not delay nor accelerate anything. They cause damage, this is natural. As I said, it’s like all the other sacrifices: when a martyr falls, the father, mother and wife are grieving, the woman becomes a widow, the mother becomes *** (word untranslatable designating the mother who lost her child), children become orphans. We are human beings, we have feelings, but it’s part of the struggle. We endure, we rely on it to go ahead, and we shape victories over these losses. We do not stop, we are not scared, we are not afraid.
Now I want to return to the point that I mentioned at the beginning, I said I would come back to it. Before 2000, the capacities of the Resistance were very modest. And now it is true that the capacities of the Resistance are very large, and it needs money, no doubt. But in the worst case, in the worst case, say this inscription on the list of terrorist organizations and financial and economic siege manage to cut a large portion of that money, or even all of the money. I declare to the US, its allies in the region and the Israeli enemy: you are very wrong in understanding the Resistance and the people.
Wherein lies this error? It stems from their culture. It is that they see their friends (allies) and the people in general as mercenaries. Every man, every individual, for the United States and its allies or instruments, is not considered a man. They consider them, as we joked before, like an S with two bars (dollar sign). Money. How much are you worth? How much do we have to pay to buy your voice (in elections)? $ 100? $ 1,000? $ 3,000? Or is it that (on the contrary), your voice is not for sale? Can your position be reversed with money, with suitcases (full of banknotes)? If one brings you suitcases, will you move from one position to another? Or is it that (on the contrary), your position cannot be bought, it’s not for sale? They see the world only through the prism of money. They do not believe in principles. If they are told that such people are people of principle, patriots, they will ask you to explain the meaning of “principle”, “patriot”, “humanity”. (They are unaware of and unable to understand) these concepts, they have no existence for them. What matters for them is the work, money, weapons trade, how much money you have, how many yachts, how many banks, how much is your oil, how much credit you have in the banks, etc. This is your value. Your value is not your good deeds, as the prophetic tradition says: “The value of a man lies in his good deeds.” Your value is the balance of your bank account.
Their mistake is to consider the Resistance as mercenaries of Iran, for example. Since Iran gives money (to Hezbollah), just like Syria, they believe that we are mercenaries, that we are fighting as mercenaries, and that if they deprive us of our money, we will stop fighting and change our position. This is their fundamental error.
This Resistance in Lebanon, Palestine and the region, those people who demonstrate every Friday in Gaza are not mercenaries. They are defenders of a cause. These Resistants, and their people, their fellow countrymen, their families, their popular base and all who are with them, (Washington and its allies) must know that they are people of principle, patriots, humanists, defenders of a cause in which they believe (fervently), and for which they fight and are willing to sacrifice, and sacrifice their dearest ones and their children. They are ready to live their entire lives in the worst conditions for their cause to triumph. Such people cannot be defeated neither by lists of terrorist organizations, nor by sanctions, nor by a financial siege or by drying up their sources of money.When you fight, in Lebanon and Palestine, those opposed to the Israeli enemy, a popular will, a popular Resistance and a popular culture, you are unable to inflict a defeat on them, regardless of any measure you can implement. That is why their (economic) battle (against us) is lost in advance.
But the condition for that, like in the military war, as in all previous challenges, is that we become aware of the essence of this (economic) war, that we understand their motive and goals, that we endure and that we make its objectives fail. And this is easy. Because if we maintain our determination, our resolve and our will, they will not be able to do anything.
Denunciation of Morocco and tribute to Algeria & SoudanEven (the US attempt) to isolate (Hezbollah) in the region (will be in vain). The fact that such country has no links with us, that another breaks relations with us, than another yet (accuses us) under a thousand false pretexts, as did Morocco just a few weeks ago without any basis of truth.
(Morocco) said that the Moroccan Minister of Foreign Affairs visited Iran, and submitted a folder to the Foreign Minister of Iran about the involvement of Hezbollah with the Polisario Front. The Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs promised to keep me informed, and he did. I asked where is the folder, but there is no folder! The Moroccan Minister of Foreign Affairs did not even provide a single file or piece of paper, although they claimed to have provided evidence and documents, but they refused to give even the sheet that… He had a sheet in his hand, from which he was reading (to the Iranian minister) the names (of Hezbollah members allegedly involved with the Polisario): so and so, so and so, so and so, so and so. (The Iranian minister) asked for the sheet, but (the Moroccan Minister) refused. Even this piece of paper (he read), he refused to give it!
Well, where is the evidence, where are the facts? Do you have videos, recordings, witnesses? Who are your witnesses? But there is absolutely nothing. (Morocco) said that so and so, so and so, so and so, so and so from Hezbollah… Moreover, some of these (Hezbollah members) have no involvement in the security and military operations, and these brothers mentioned work in very remote locations from each other, so it is clear that it is the Israeli intelligence that provided the names to Morocco, but there is no link between these (Hezbollah) brothers. (Morocco is merely asserting emphatically that) Hezbollah supports the Polisario, and it breaks its ties with Iran, (just like that).
While we have no relationship with the Polisario, not even political relations. I do not even take a position on this issue, that we have not studied, and on which we have no position, neither negative nor positive. In truth, there is no relationship between us, not even political, we have no contact, but we will see Morocco accuse us of having received the Polisario in Lebanon, of having visited them in their town –I do not even remember its name, it was the first time I was hearing of it–, of having provided them with support, training, training camps, weapons, etc.
Anyway, these accusations and actions are futile, they will have no result in terms of resolution and determination of the Resistance. Before 2000, when the Resistance has triumphed and achieved this feat of which we celebrate the 18th anniversary today (Lebanon’s Liberation), it had no regional relations. There was Iran and Syria, nothing else. We could have friendly relations with the Embassy of Algeria, the Sudanese Embassy, ​​such or such country, but we did not have regional relations. Rather, many did not even dare to open links or contacts with us, because since 1992, we are on the list of terrorist organizations.
Therefore, all these measures of political, diplomatic and financial siege, these intimidations, I say to our enemies that they will not change anything. The Resistance that has shaped the victory of 2000, this glorious and resounding victory that imposed on the (Israeli) enemy to get out humiliated and crushed, with no clause, without any conditions, without any concession whatsoever (only by the force of arms, as Hezbollah refused any negotiations with Israel), the Resistance is stronger today, more powerful, more robust, even regarding the determination, faith, principles, soul, mind, until the new generations that you think (corrupted by materialism).
It is this new generation that fought in 2006, and much of our martyrs are part of the generation born in the 1990s. And today, it is also the case for the great battle that was conducted in the region (Syria). When you participate in the fight against the American project in the region, in Syria… We are proudly and publicly involved in this crucial battle. And it is during such a commemoration (on May 25) that I announced our entry into this battle several years ago (in 2013). And we said then that the US and its allies have gathered the takfiris from all around the world to bring down Damascus and the Syrian State, and I said in a speech like this, without vis-a-vis, that the Syrian leadership, the Syrian people and the Syrian army and its allies would never allow Damascus to fall, whatever sacrifices were required.Today, on the occasion of the holiday of the Resistance and Liberation, which we celebrate to commemorate the South(-Lebanon) Liberation, today also, we address Syria, the Syrian leadership, the Syrian Arab Army, the Syrian people and all their loyal allies, and we congratulate them for the liberation of Damascus, the Damascus suburbs and the whole Damascus area in its entirety, freed from any danger and any (terrorist armed) organization, especially during this last battle against ISIS and the glorious victory that took place there, and now that all Syria goes from success to success, successes that set up the next stage (of reconstruction). Those who (like Hezbollah) take such positions must bear the consequences, and I declare that we are stronger, more determined and more present, and with God’s grace, these (diplomatic sanctions) will have absolutely no effect. […]

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 the Blog!

Jeremy Corbyn ‘West’s Support Of israeli Violence Is Shameful’

Corbyn said: "The silence, or worse support, for this flagrant illegality, from many Western governments, including our own, has been shameful,"
“The silence, or worse support, for this flagrant illegality, from many Western governments, including our own, has been shameful,” said Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.
The United Kingdom’s Labour Party leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has criticized Israel’s killing of Palestinian protesters – along with the “silence” and “support” of Western governments – as “shameful.”

“The killing of Razzan Najjar, the 22-year-old medical volunteer shot by an Israeli sniper in Gaza on Friday, is the latest tragic reminder of the outrageous and indiscriminate brutality being meted out, under orders from the (Benjamin) Netanyahugovernment,” Corbny said in a Facebook post.
“The silence, or worse support, for this flagrant illegality, from many Western governments, including our own, has been shameful.”
Corbyn said the United Kingdom, as a permanent U.N. Security Council member, has a “particular responsibility” to ensure there is accountability and “effective international action to halt the killings.”
“The U.K. government’s decision not to support either a U.N. Commission of Inquiry into the shocking scale of killings of civilian protesters in Gaza, or the more recent UN resolution condemning indiscriminate Israeli use of force – and calling for the protection of Palestinians – is morally indefensible,” the Labour leader said.
Last week, the United States vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution that condemned Israel’s use of force against Palestinians after it had passed the vote. The United Kingdom abstained from the vote, while France, Russia, Bolivia, China, Ivory Coast, Kazakhstan, Peru, Sweden, and Ecuatorial Guinea backed the Kuwait-proposed measure.
The United States had put forward a counter measure condemning and blaming Palestinian political group Hamas for the violence, a measure that did not receive the support of a single country in the 15-member council.

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 the Blog!