Sunday, 5 November 2017

British Treachery: Balfour Declaration vs Hussein-McMahon Agreement

Balfour Declaration
A look at history assures us that successive British kingdoms/governments up to the present day have a very atrocious history perpetrating brutal terrorism, genocides, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, rapes of women and children, violations of human rights, whole scale destruction, the ugliest racism, betrayals, theft of land and natural resources of all the other countries in the whole world on every continent without any exaggeration. Let us remember that once the sun never set on British colonies.
One out of thousands of these crimes is the illegal creation of the terrorist state of Israel in Palestine violating the rights of the indigenous Palestinians with genocidal crimes, ethnic cleansing and land theft, and initiating successive brutal wars in the Middle East that are still being waged up to this very minute.
This was accomplished by the November 2nd 1917 Balfour Declaration in a letter form to Walter Rothschild; the head of the British Zionists Organization, promising that the British government would bring about “a national home for the Jewish people in Palestine”.
Due to some opposition within the British Cabinet and by some orthodox Jewish Rabbis in Europe to the Zionist program, the document (Balfour Declaration) went through four drafts before its final form. The drafting began under the guidance of Chaim Weizmann (a Russian Zionist leader, who served as the President of the Zionist Organization) to the Zionist drafting team (Jewish Zionist Nathaniel Rothschild and Leopold Amery, and pro-Zionist Alfred Milner, Cecil Rhodes and Richard Haldane.)
The final draft was watered down with intentional ambiguous terms such as “national home” rather than “state”, and “in Palestine” rather than the whole “Palestine”. Balfour’s role was mere signing the document.
The document contained four main clauses. The first two promised to support “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people” disregarding the fact that Judaism is a religion rather than a nationality.
The other two clauses were considered safeguard clauses with respect to “the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish [Goyim] communities in Palestine” [negating the political and self-determination rights of the 90% peaceful co-existence Christian and Muslim Palestinian population], and “the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”
The British government; a party who did not have any right at all to Palestine, had promised the country that belongs to Palestinians, a second party, to a third party, Zionists, who did not have any relation at all to the land, and who had mis-represented and distorted authentic Judaism to herd Jews; citizens from other countries, into Palestine for the colonial scheme of Greater Israel from Nile to Euphrates.
Emir Faisal’s party at Versailles, during the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. At the centre, from left to right: Rustum Haidar, Nuri as-Said, Prince Faisal, Captain Pisani (behind Faisal), T. E. Lawrence (known as “Lawrence of Arabia”), unknown, Captain Tahsin Qadri.
These Zionists did not hesitate to perpetrate terrorist attacks even against their sponsor; British forces, such as the bombing of King David hotel, in order to achieve their colonial goals. Since the establishment of the Israeli terrorist state the whole Middle Eastern region has been plagued with perpetual destructive wars where the forces of the whole Western world have been deeply involved providing arms and money and sacrificing the lives of their own soldiers for Israel’s sake.
The spitefulness, the immorality, the illegality and the treachery of the Balfour Declaration has been this week the main talk of many politicians and writers. Yet none mentioned the British betrayal of the Hussein-McMahon agreement that is closely related to the same subject.
Unlike Balfour Declaration that was a mere letter from a British official to a British citizen, both aliens to Palestine and had never lived in the country, Hussein-McMahon agreement of 1915-1916 was an official political agreement between the representatives of two countries that had precedence over the 1917 Balfour Declaration.
Hussein-McMahon agreement/correspondence was a series of ten letters, both in English and Arabic, exchanged between Hussein bin Ali, the Sharif (ruler) of Mecca, and Lieutenant Colonel Sir Henry McMahon, who was the British High Commissioner to Egypt representing Britain.
The ten letters expressed the British meditated and well-thought of foreign policy and commitment to Sharif Hussein to recognize an Independent Arabia “in the limits and boundaries proposed by the Sharif of Mecca” in exchange for launching an Arab Revolt against the Ottoman Empire during WWI. The agreed upon boundaries extended from Syria north to the Arabian Peninsula south, and from the Persian Gulf east to the Mediterranean west.
Considering McMahon’s promises as a formal British agreement, Hussein launched the Arab revolt against the Ottoman Empire. Thomas Edward Lawrence, known as Lawrence of Arabia, was the British liaison to Hussein, through whom Britain supplied arms to the Arab Revolt.
The Arab Revolt was the British proxy army against the Ottoman Empire and many Arabs sacrificed their lives to free their country from the Ottoman rule. The Revolt was successful in liberation the whole Arabia.
Treacherous, as they had always been and still are, British government in May 1916 entered into a secret agreement with France known as Sykes-Picot Agreement, whereby the two countries would split the Arab World at the end of the war into two parts under their rules. The French would rule Syria, Lebanon and parts of Iraq while Britain would rule the rest of Iraq, Palestine and Jordan.
During the war the German forces penetrated into large areas of France and the Allied forces were not able to force them out of France since they had suffered great losses especially during the battle of the Somme in the fall of 1916. When the Ottoman Empire entered the war siding with Germany, Britain was on the verge of financial collapse.
An offer of peace was conveyed by the American ambassador to Britain on behalf of the Central powers to the Allies but the British Prime Minister, David Lloyd George, who was approached secretly by Chaim Weismann, rejected it and vowed that Britain would fight on until victory. Weismann offered to have the Zionist Organization convince the American President, Woodrow Wilson to enter the war on the side of the Allies on the condition that Britain would facilitate the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine.
Backed by Zionist money, Woodrow Wilson, who was re-elected to a second term as the American president under the slogan of keeping America out of war, needed a justification to lead the US into the war. The US was smuggling weapons to the Allies onto passenger ships through the German imposed sea war zone around the UK. The British liner Lusitania was one of these passenger ships. An intentional leak was sent to the German embassy in the US that the Lusitania is carrying a large load of arms to the Allies.
The German embassy, then, placed newspaper advertisements warning passengers of the danger of sailing on the Lusitania. German submarine launched a torpedo at the Lusitania that ignited the smuggled arms shipment, and the Lusitania sank causing the loss of almost 1,200 lives including 128 Americans. This was the justification Wilson needed to enter the war against Germany. The British then issued the Balfour Declaration as a fulfillment of their end of the bargain with the Zionists.
Hussein rejected the Sykes-Picot Agreement and the Balfour Declaration considering them a British betrayal and a great violation of the Hussein-McMahon agreement. Several British officials; David Hogarth, the head of Arab Bureau in Cairo, Field Marshal Edmund Allenby (known as the Bloody Bull), as well as the Anglo-French Declaration of 1918, misleadingly assured Hussein of the British intent of establishing an independent Arabia with a national government and administration.
Sir Henry McMahon and Sharif Hussein bin Ali
Yet, in April 1920 at the Conference of London and the San Remo Conference the Allied Supreme Council ignored the Arab struggle and aspiration for independence, and executed the Sykes-Picot agreement imposing a British mandate and a French mandate on the region.
Hussein did not accept Balfour Declaration nor an independent Jewish state in Palestine as indicated by British Commander David Hogarth, so he needed to be “removed” out of the way. The British supported and armed the Saudi family to fight Hussein, who was eventually exiled to Cypress until 1930, then moved to Transjordan to live with his son Abdullah until his death in 1931.
The British government, British Zionist organizations and Zionist Christians are planning on celebrating the centenary of the Balfour Declaration calling it “God’s Work”  establishing state of Israel and returning the Jewish people to their alleged biblical homeland. On the other side Palestinian groups as well as officials from the Palestinian Authority, including Abbas, are demanding a British apology and British recognition of a Palestinian state.
Pro-Palestinian groups launched a petition, signed by more than 13,600 people calling on British government to scrap plans to celebrate this most shameful event and arguing that Theresa May, the Prime Minister, should instead issue an apology.
The British government and Most of the British politicians, instead, expressed their pride of what they called the British role in the establishment of the (terrorist) Israeli state. The British Foreign Office stated “Balfour Declaration is one of the most important letters in history which Her Majesty’s government does not intend to apologize. We are proud of our role in creating the state of Israel.”
Theresa May stated the following statements in different occasions:
“As Prime Minister, I am proud to say that I support Israel. And it is absolutely right that we should mark the vital role that Britain played a century ago in helping to create a homeland for the Jewish people … born of that letter, the pen of Balfour, and of the efforts of so many people, is a remarkable country … We are proud of the role that we played in the creation of Israel and we will certainly mark the centenary with pride” Then she reiterated the meaningless empty British commitment to the dead and impractical two state solution.
Boris Johnson, the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs stated vehemently that he is proud that Britain helped creating Israel “… to become a free society with thriving and innovative economy and the same ESSENTIAL VALUES that we in Britain hold dear.” These “essential values” are terrorism, genocide, ethnic cleansing, destruction and theft of land among many other.
It is worthwhile mentioning here that 80% of the British MPs are Zionist puppets, claimed to be signed-up members of Friends of Israel, a membership that is considered a stepping-stone to higher political office. Therefore, one must not wonder that these politicians exhibit this pathological inhumane complete denial of the British colonial crimes and responsibility for occupation of Palestine and the genocide of its indigenous people not mentioning the other multiple crimes around the world.
The British celebration of Balfour Declaration/the establishment of the terrorist Israeli state is also a celebration of Palestinian genocide, ethnic cleansing and continuous suffering, plus all the devastating wars for Israel in the Middle East that Britain is still supporting up till this very minute.
The sought for apology is so meaningless since it does not resolve any issue. What the majority of the people are not cognizant of is that the Balfour Declaration creating the terrorist state of Israel is just another link in the Hidden Hand’s colonial scheme to prevent the establishment of a strong independent Arabia in the most important geostrategic and oil rich Middle East.
To learn more about this specific issue read my last year’s article “Balfour Declaration vs Hussein-McMahon Correspondence”.

About Author: Dr. Elias Akleh is an Arab American from a Palestinian descent. His family was evicted from Haifa, Palestine, after the 1948 Nakba when the Zionists stole his family’s property. Then the family was evicted again from the West Bank during the 1967 Naksah, after the Zionist, again, occupied the rest of Palestine.
The McMahon–Hussein letter of 25 October 1915. George Antonius – who had been the first to publish the correspondence in full – described this letter as “by far the most important in the whole correspondence, and may perhaps be regarded as the most important international document in the history of the Arab national movement… is still invoked as the main piece of evidence on which the Arabs accuse Great Britain of having broken faith with them.

To learn more about this specific issue read my last year’s article “Balfour Declaration vs Hussein-McMahon Correspondence”

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!

Nonsense, he means he didn’t bother to research: Iraq War: Gordon Brown says UK ‘misled’ over WMDs

The UK was misled over former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s access to weapons of mass destruction, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said.
Mr Brown says US intelligence, which challenged the extent of Iraq’s WMD stockpile, was not shared with the UK before it joined the Iraq War.
In an extract from his memoir, the ex-Labour leader says “we were not just misinformed, but misled”.
Mr Brown says he became aware of the “crucial” paper after leaving office.
The Iraq War – which divided British public opinion – began in March 2003, with the conflict and its aftermath claiming the lives of 179 UK troops.
The UK joined the US-led invasion after both countries jointly accused Saddam Hussein of possessing weapons of mass destruction and having links to terrorism.
British intelligence from 2002, seen at the time by the then-Prime Minister Tony Blair and Mr Brown, suggested the country was capable of having such weapons.
“I was told they knew where the weapons were,” Mr Brown writes.
“I remember thinking at the time that it was almost as if they could give me the street name and number where they were located.”
But, Mr Brown says a report commissioned at the time by the then-US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld “forcibly challenged” this view.

‘War unjustified’

He said it suggested other intelligence had relied “heavily on analytic assumptions” rather than hard evidence, and disproved Iraq’s capability to make weapons of mass destruction.
“If I am right that somewhere within the American system the truth about Iraq’s lack of weapons was known, then we were not just misinformed but misled on the critical issue,” he writes in My Life, Our Times.
Tony Blair in Iraq in December 2004
Image copyright AFP Image caption Tony Blair ordered UK troops into battle in March 2003
A seven-year inquiry into the UK’s involvement in the Iraq War found Saddam Hussein posed “no imminent threat” when the US and UK invaded.
The Chilcot report also concluded that “flawed” intelligence started the war.
According to Mr Brown, the UK may never have agreed to take part if the information had been shared.
“Given that Iraq had no usable chemical, biological or nuclear weapons that it could deploy and was not about to attack the coalition, then two tests of a just war were not met: war could not be justified.”
Despite this, he did say some action was required due to the failure of Saddam Hussein complying with UN resolutions.

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!

WMD in Syria just like Iraq in 2003? – Contradictions in the UN/OPCW Report on Khan Shaykhun

Source
Syria chemical weapons 1e28b
In early 2003 it was claimed that Iraq was a threat to other countries. Despite ten years of crushing economic sanctions plus intrusive inspections, supposedly Iraq had acquired enough “weapons of mass destruction” to threaten the West. It was ridiculous on its face but few people in power said so. Establishment politicians and media across the U.S. promoted the idea. In the Senate, Joe Biden chaired the committee looking into the allegations but excluded knowledgeable critics such as Scott Ritter. This led to the invasion of Iraq.
Today we have something similarly ridiculous and dangerous. Supposedly the Syrian government decided to use a banned chemical weapon which they gave up in 2013-2014. Despite advancing against the insurgents, the Syrian government supposedly put sarin in a Russian chemical weapon canister and dropped this on the town Khan Shaykhun which has been under the control of Syria’s version of Al Qaeda for years. To top off the stupidity, they left paint markings on the canister which identify it as a chemical weapon. Supposedly the Syrian government did this despite knowing there are many “White Helmet” activists in the town along with with their cameras, videos, computers, internet uplinks and western social media promoters. Supposedly the Syrian government did this despite knowing that neo-conservatives, neo-liberals and zionists are keen to prolong the conflict and drag the US and NATO into it. Supposedly the Syrian government did this despite knowing the one thing that could trigger direct US aggression in the conflict is the use of chemical weapons …. the “red line” laid down by Barack Obama.
If the above sounds unlikely, it is. But even if these accusations should be laughed out of the room, as they should have been in 2002, let’s take the claims about the event at Khan Shaykun in Syria on 4 April 2017 seriously. Certainly the consequences will be serious if the trend is not reversed.
What Happened at Khan Shaykhun?
The report titled “Seventh report of the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism” was provided to select governments and media on Thursday 26 October. Media announced the key finding without criticism or question. They highlighted the sentence that the committee is “confident that the Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin in Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017”.
About 36 hours later, the report was leaked via the internet.  But the die was already cast as establishment media had “confirmed” Syrian guilt.
Following are key contradictions and inconsistencies in the report produced by the Joint Investigative Mechanism of the UN and Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).
* THE INVESTIGATION IGNORES THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF MOTIVE. 
The three essentials in criminal investigation are Motive, Means and Opportunity. All three must be present. Yet the investigation team ignores the question of motive. The Syrian government has every motive to NOT use proscribed weapons. On the other side, the armed opposition has a strong motive to implicate the Syrian government. They have been calling for US and NATO intervention for years. They are losing ground, recruits and allies. Yet these facts are never considered.
* THE INVESTIGATION RELIES PRIMARILY ON BIASED SOURCES.
On page 1 the Joint Investigative Mechanism claims they have conducted a “rigorous independent examination”. But most experts and witnesses are biased toward the “regime change” policies of western governments.  On page 4 the report says“The Mechanism engaged several internationally recognized forensic and specialist defense institutes… to provide forensic and expert support to the investigation.”
Any “defense institute” connected or contracting with France, UK or USA will have inherent assumptions and bias since these governments have actively promoted overthrow of the Syrian government.
* THE INVESTIGATION IGNORES CREDIBLE BUT CRITICAL ANALYSES.
The Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) team makes no mention of the published analysis and findings of numerous researchers, investigative journalists and scientists. For example:
– MIT Professor Theodore Postol has analyzed the Khan Shaykhun incident. He persuasively challenges the main theory about the crater site and munition.  
– American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh has also written about he incident. His information from U.S. military and intelligence officers reveal that the American military knew about the forthcoming attack in advance.  He reports the Syrian jet attack was “not a chemical weapons strike …. That’s a fairy tale.”
– Investigative journalist Gareth Porter has written an expose titled “Have We Been Deceived over Syrian Sarin Attack? Scrutinizing the Evidence in an Incident Trump Used to Justify Bombing Syria”. Porter presents a devastating critique of the sarin-crater theory. He documents how easily false positives for sarin could have been created and how the OPCW has violated their own investigation protocols.
– Researcher Adam Larson has written an expose titled “Syria Sarin Allegation: How the UN-Panel Report Twists and Omits Evidence”. After closely inspecting the photographs and videos, he questions whether the victims are civilians kidnapped from a nearby village five days previously. Larson’s site “A Closer Look at Syria” has a good index of videos and articles on this and other events.
The above “open source” analysis and information was published well before the current report but apparently not considered. A “rigorous, independent examination” needs to evaluate investigations such as these.
* VICTIMS APPEAR BEFORE THE ATTACK.
On pages 28-29 it is reported that “Certain irregularities were observed in elements of information analyzed. For example, several hospitals appeared to start admitting casualties of the attack between 0640 and 0645 hours…. in 57 cases patients were admitted in five hospitals before the incident in Khan Shaykhun….in 10 such cases, patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 125 km away from Khan Shaykhun at 0700 hours while another 42 patients appear to have been admitted to a hospital 30 km away at 0700 hours.”
It is reported that “The Mechanism did not investigate these discrepancies and cannot determine whether they are linked to any possible staging scenario, or to poor record-keeping in chaotic conditions”. Given the importance of determining whether this incident was caused by the Syrian government or staged by elements of the armed opposition and their supporters, why were these discrepancies not investigated further? Clearly it is not possible that victims were transported 125 kms and delivered to a hospital in 15 minutes. This is potentially powerful evidence of a staged event.
* ‘WHITE HELMETS’ WERE WARNING OF A CHEMICAL WEAPON ATTACK BEFORE THE ATTACK.
On page 20 it says “The Mechanism collected information from witnesses to the effect that a first warning of a possible upcoming chemical attack was received by “Syrian Civil Defense” (also known as the “White Helmets”) and spotters in Kahn Shaykun…. The witness stated that the alert advised residents to be careful as the aircraft was likely carrying toxic chemicals.”
It seems reasonable to ask: Was the advance talk of “toxic chemicals” a signal to get ready for a staged event? How would a plane spotter know there was a one-time chemical bomb aboard? This is another area that needs more investigation.
* WERE SYRIAN PLANES OVER KHAN SHAYKHUN AT THE CRITICAL TIME?
The basic question of whether or not there were Syrian jets over Khan Shaykhun is unanswered. The Syrian military says they did NOT fly over Khan Shaykhun in the early morning.
Page 21 documents that the Syrian pilot and log books record that the Su-22 jet was executing attacks at other nearby towns and not closer than 7 – 9 kms from Khan Shaykhun. Radar track data from the U.S. appears to support this, indicating the Syrian jet path was 5 kms from Khan Shaykun.
On page 7 it says “SAAF aircraft may have been in a position to launch aerial bombs” (underline added).  On page 22 it says, “the witness reported waking up at around 0700 hours on 4 April 2017 to the sound of explosions. The witness stated that there had been no aircraft over Khan Shaykhun at the time and that aircraft had only started launching attacks at around 1100 hours.” (underline added)
There are conflicting testimonies on this issue but curiously no video showing jet fighters at the time of the explosions in Khan Shaykun. It is unconfirmed how the ground explosions occurred.
* THE INVESTIGATION TEAM DID NOT TRY TO VISIT THE SCENE OF THE CRIME.
On page 3 the report says “The Mechanism did not visit the scenes of the incidents…. While the Leadership Panel considered that a visit to these sites would have been of value, such value would diminish over time. Further, the panel was required to weigh the security risks against the possible benefits to the investigation.”
While it is certainly appropriate to consider security, the actual scene of a crime provides unique opportunities for evidence. The OPCW has previously stated the necessity of having access to a crime site then taking and transferring samples to a certified lab with a clear chain of custody.
If the insurgents still controlling Khan Shaykhun have nothing to hide, they should welcome the investigation.
Furthermore, Russian authorities offered to guarantee the safety of the inspection team. Yet the investigation team apparently made no effort to visit the site. Why? In an investigation of this importance, with potentially huge political consequences, visiting and analyzing the scene of the crime should be a requirement if at all possible.
* THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE COME FROM INSURGENTS WITH NO VERIFIABLE CHAIN OF CUSTODY.
On page 23 it says “Samples taken from the crater and its surroundings were found by the Fact Finding Mission to contain sarin.” On the day of the event, insurgents took soil samples and victims to Turkey where they were received and subsequently tested. Without verified origins and “chain of custody”, this data cannot be verified and must be considered skeptically.
As indicated in the report, one theory about the 4 April 2017 event is that it was staged to implicate the Syrian government. If that theory is correct, it is predictable that the plotters would have samples prepared in advance, including sarin samples with markers matched to the Syrian stockpile. The Syrian sarin was destroyed aboard the US vessel “MV Cape Ray”. Given the heavy involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Syrian conflict it is likely they analyzed and retained some portion.
* THE REPORT REPEATS DISCREDITED CLAIMS ABOUT BOMB FRAGMENT AND FILLER CAP.
On page 26 it is reported that “two objects of interest … were the filler cap from a chemical munition and a deformed piece of metal protruding from deep within the crater. According to information obtained by the Mechanism, the filler cap, with two closure plugs, is uniquely consistent with Syrian chemical aerial bombs.”
This information may come from a Human Rights Watch report which has been discredited. The “filler cap” was supposedly a match for an external plug for a Russian chemical weapon bomb but was found to not match and to be based on a 1950’s era museum photo. An insightful and amusing critique of the HRW report is //medium.com/@AdrianKent/hrws-death-by-chemicals-report-walking-through-the-smoke-2d6d46ec0db8“>here.
The authenticity of the fragments in the crater is also challenged by the lack of a tailfin or any other bomb fragments. A chemical weapon bomb is designed to release and not burn up the chemical and therefore the munition casing should be on site.
* STRANGE ACTIONS SUGGESTING A STAGED EVENT 
On page 28 the report notes methods and procedures “that appeared either unusual or inappropriate in the circumstances.”  For example they observe that a Drager X-am 7000 air monitor was shown detecting sarin when that device is not able to detect sarin, and “para-medical interventions that did not seem to make medical sense, such as performing heart compression on a patient facing the ground.”
On page 29 it is reported that one victim had blood test showing negative for sarin and urine test showing positive. This is an impossible combination. Also on page 29 it is noted that some of the rescue operations were inappropriate but might have been “attempts to inflate the gravity of the situation for depiction in the media.”
The report does not mention the video which shows “White Helmet” responders handling victims without any gloves or protection. If the patients truly died from sarin, touching the patients’ skin or clothing could be fatal. Incidents such as these support the theory that this was a contrived and staged event with real victims.
* THE TEAM IS “CONFIDENT” IN THEIR CONCLUSIONS YET BASIC FACTS ARE IN DISPUTE.
On page 22, the report acknowledges that “To date the Mechanism has not found specific information confirming whether or not an SAA Su-22 operating from Al Shayrat airbase launched an aerial attack against Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017.”
How can they be “confident that the Syrian Arab Republic is responsible for the release of sarin at Khan Shaykhun on 4 April 2017” when such basics have not been confirmed?
CONCLUSION
The report of the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) gives the impression of much more certainty than is actually there. Seizing on the false “confidence”, the White House has denounced the “horrifying barbarism of Bashar al Assad” and “lack of respect for international norms” by Syria’s ally Russia. International diplomacy is being steadily eroded. .
Most western “experts” were dead wrong in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. Are these same “experts”, institutes, intelligence agencies and biased organizations going to take us down the road to new aggression, this time against Syria?
In contrast with the JIM report, Gareth Porter reached the opposite conclusion: “The evidence now available makes it clear that the scene suggesting a sarin attack at the crater was a crudely staged deception.” That is also more logical. The armed opposition had the motive, means and opportunity.

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!

’Israel’s’ Coming War with Hezbollah


04-11-2017 | 12:06

Analyzing a possible future ‘Israeli’ war with Hezbollah, Thomas Donnelly cited Willy Stern’s in his “Missiles Everywhere,” as saying that an ‘Israel’-Hezbollah conflict would be nasty and brutish but not short.
Israeli vehicle on fire

Ever since its 2006 clash with ‘Israel’, Hezbollah has been stockpiling hundreds of thousands of rockets, missiles, and mortars capable of reaching not just border areas but deep into ‘Israel,’ Donnelly wrote for The Weekly Standard.
“This arsenal includes hundreds of ballistic missiles capable of carrying chemical warheads as well as substantial conventional explosives,” he further noted.
More important is their improved accuracy; Hezbollah might actually hit something for a change, and not just large cities like Jerusalem [al-Quds] and Tel Aviv but military bases and airports. Despite ‘Israel’s’ development of the “Iron Dome,” “Arrow,” and “David’s Sling,” it’s unlikely that an all-out or sustained series of attacks could be fully blunted.
According to the author, Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said in June that the resistance men would be reinforced in battle by “tens.  .  . or even hundreds of thousands” of fighters from Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. In parallel, ‘Israeli’ intelligence assessments put the likely strength of such forces at about 40,000.
Jeffrey White of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy has long argued that the next ‘Israel’-Hezbollah conflict would be quite unlike the 2006 edition of this “forever” war or any of the recent ‘Israeli’ campaigns against Hamas. The numbers of missiles, including anti-ship cruise missiles, would dwarf previous Hezbollah salvos and, including upgraded versions of the ubiquitous Scud, could be launched from deep within Lebanon at targets deep within ‘Israel’. And ‘Israel’ could well confront its nightmare scenario-a two-front war in the form of simultaneous attacks launched from the Syrian part of the Golan Heights.
‘Israel’ has not faced such a powerful threat since the 1973 war, and confronting the Iran-Hezbollah-Assad coalition will tax the ‘Israeli’ Occupation Forces [IOF] heavily. While the ‘Israeli’ air force has long ruled the local skies, the proliferation of advanced Russian-made air defenses calls into question how rapidly-and at what cost-the IOF can establish or sustain the kind of air supremacy it will need. The best way to remove the Hezbollah missile threat is to seek and destroy the launchers or to deny use of customary launch sites. The ‘Israelis’ have worked very hard to improve their mobile-missile-hunting abilities, but this would be a risky mission.
‘Israel’ has worked to improve the survivability of its mechanized infantry and armored forces and the responsiveness, lethality, and accuracy of its artillery.
For its part, Hezbollah, which showed considerable tactical skill in defending southern Lebanon in 2006, has added advanced anti-armor weaponry and new layers of defenses. The terrain in southern Lebanon and on the Golan is well suited for such purposes; ‘Israel’ will have to pick its way forward cautiously, through ambush after ambush, and ultimately it may have to go farther north and east than in 2006, the writer concluded.
Source: The Weekly Standard, Edited by website team

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!

Lebanese PM Hariri Resigns After Saudi Trips

Source

04-11-2017 | 15:19
Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri has announced his resignation in a speech broadcast from Saudi Arabia.
Lebanese PM Saad Hariri
Hariri announced his resignation in a televised statement on Saturday, citing many reasons, including the security situation in Lebanon, for his sudden decision.
He also said that he sensed a plot being hatched against his life.
Hariri announced his resignation following his visits to Saudi Arabia.
Separately, a source at Baabda Palace said that the resignation of a prime minister could be submitted in writing or in a public announcement, as Hariri has done.
President Michel Aoun confirmed that he had received a phone call from Hariri, during which the latter had informed him of his resignation.
A statement from the presidency said that Aoun would wait for Hariri to return to Beirut in order to “discuss the circumstances behind his resignation and to build [on this].”
For his part, Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri cut short his Egypt visit, to return to Beirut following Hariri’s resignation.
The resignation also comes less than a month after he announced plans to join a coalition government with Lebanese Resistance Movement Hezbollah.
He became prime minister in 2016 after serving another term between November 2009 and June 2011.
Saad Hariri is the son of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005. Hariri has also been the leader of the Future Movement party since 2005.
Source: news Agencies, Edited by website team

President Aoun Learns about Government Resignation by Phone

Lebanese President Michel Aoun
In an issued statement by President of the Republic, Michel Aoun’s media bureau on Saturday, it indicated that the President was informed by telephone of Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s government resignation.
“President Aoun received a telephone call from Prime Minister Saad Hariri, currently outside Lebanon, informing him of the resignation of his government,” the statement said.
It was learnt that President Aoun is awaiting the return of Prime Minister Hariri to Beirut to know more about the circumstances of his resignation.
Source: NNA

Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri Submits Resignation

1
The Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced in Saudi the resignation of the cabinet, saying that Iran has scattered the sedition and destruction in the Arab world.
Delivering the resignation statement, Hariri said that the dominating political atmosphere resembles that which preceded the assassination of his father, the former PM Rafik Hariri, adding that he hopes that the Lebanese would be able to overcome the internal and foreign guardianship.
Source: Al-Manar Website
Related Videos


Related News
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!

(اسرائيل” تهاجم حَضَر: المنطقة العازلة لن تكتمل…دمشق تمتلك اليد العليا ميدانيّاً وشعبياً”


فراس الشوفي

انقلب السحر على الساحر أمس، بعد فشل الهجوم الذي رعته وأدارته (إسرائيل) ونفّذته الجماعات الإرهابية في القنيطرة على بلدة حَضَر. فبدل أن يلجأ أهالي البلدة ذات الغالبيةمن الموحدون الدروز إلى طلب الحماية من “إسرائيل”، ردّ الأهالي والجيش السوري هجوم الإرهابيين وانتفض الجولان المحتلّ وبعض قرى الجليل ضد الدعم الإسرائيلي للإرهابيين، ما سبّب إحراجاً كبيراً لقادة جيش الاحتلال وسياسييه

لا تَمَلّ إسرائيل من محاولات قلب معادلة التفوّق التي ثبّتها الجيش السوري وحلفاؤه في الجنوب السوري طوال السنوات الماضية، ضد المجموعات الإرهابية المسلّحة بمختلف تصنيفاتها. منذ عام 2014، ترجم السوريون الغلبة العسكرية توسيعاً لرقعة سيطرة الجيش وتفكيكاً للبيئة التي احتضنت المسلّحين في بداية الحرب، عبر المصالحات وإعادة التواصل بين الدولة وغالبية الفعاليات المحليّة في القرى التي لا تزال تحتلها الجماعات الإرهابية.

إلّا أن امتلاك دمشق لليد العليا في الجنوب، ميدانيّاً وشعبياً، ثُبِّت سياسياً في اتفاق «خفض التصعيد»، الذي نتج بعد المفاوضات الروسية ــ الأميركية في تموز الماضي، تاركاً إسرائيل خاسراً وحيداً في الاتفاق، قياساً إلى الطموحات الإسرائيلية، التي رفع سقفها قادة العدوّ في القنيطرة ودرعا، وصولاً إلى السويداء والبادية السورية.
وفيما تُرك الإرهابيون لمصيرهم بعد الانكفاء الأردني الكبير، رفعت “إسرائيل” من منسوب تزويد هذه الجماعات بالسلاح والمال والدعم اللوجستي، بغية تحقيق مصالحها المتمثّلة في إبعاد الجيش وحلفائه عن الحدود مع الجولان المحتلّ، ومحاولة فرض ما عجزت عنه مع حلفائها الخليجيين والغربيين في غرفة «الموك» طوال السنوات الماضية.

تشكّل حَضَر ثغرة رئيسية في المنطقة العازلة التي تحاول إسرائيل تشكيلها في الجولان

ولم يكن هجوم الإرهابيين أمس على بلدة حَضَر في ريف القنيطرة الشمالي، المنسّق والمُعدّ إسرائيليّاً، مفاجئاً. فشعبة الاستخبارات العسكرية السورية والأجهزة الأمنية العاملة في الجنوب كانت تتابع عن كثب تحضيرات إسرائيل والمجموعات التابعة لها في القنيطرة، خلال الأسابيع الماضية، للهجوم على حضر، الذي حقّق تقدّماً محدوداً في بدايته بفعل استخدام آلية مفخخة يقودها انتحاري، ومن زاوية «ميتة» ملاصقة للشريط مع الجولان المحتلّ، قبل أن يمتصّ الجيش وحلفاؤه موجة الهجوم الأولى ويستعيد غالبية النقاط التي خسرها قبيل ظهر يوم أمس.

الأهداف الإسرائيلية

يمكن القول إن الهجوم على حضر لو نجح، لكان حقّق جملة من الأهداف التي تستميت إسرائيل لتحقيقها في الميدان والسياسة، مع الأخذ بعين الاعتبار الحذر الإسرائيلي من الانغماس في المستنقع السوري بشكل مباشر.
أوّلاً، تحتاج الجماعات المسلّحة إلى انتصار عسكري ما، في ظلّ الإحباط الذي يعاني منه قادتها، جراء الشحّ المالي والصراعات القاتلة في ما بينها، والهوة بين قادة المجموعات الإرهابية والوفد الذي يشارك في مفاوضات أستانا، وقريباً في مفاوضات مدينة سوتشي الروسية (حتى الآن فشل ما يسمّى مؤتمر حوران في توحيد الفصائل)، فضلاً عن الاغتيالات اليومية بالعبوات والرصاص، التي يتعرّض لها قادة الإرهابيين وضياع دم القتلى «بين القبائل»، وعجز ما يسمّى «دار العدل» عن ضبط الوضع الأمني في المناطق التي يسيطر عليها الإرهابيون.
ثانياً، الهجوم على حضر يجمّد هجوم الجيش على بيت جن ومزرعة بيت جن، الذي بدأ قبل نحو شهر، ونجح في فصل جبل الشيخ عن القنيطرة، فيما وضع المسلّحون هدفاً معلناً لعملية أمس، بإعادة وصل بيت جن بالقنيطرة وفكّ الحصار عنها، وهي التي بات قادة المسلحين فيها، على مختلف انتماءاتهم، يعملون بشكل علني مع شعبة الاستخبارات العسكرية الإسرائيلية وقيادة الفرقة 210 في الجولان المحتلّ.

ثالثاً، لا تزال حضر، إلى جانب مدينتي البعث وخان أرنبة، الفجوة الوحيدة التي تقع تحت سيطرة الجيش، على طول الشريط الملاصق للجولان المحتلّ والممتد من بيت جن على السفح الشرقي لجبل الشيخ حتى مدينة الرفيد غرب درعا (عدا عن منطقة حوض اليرموك التي تسيطر عليها عصابات «داعش»). وبالتالي، فإن السيطرة على حضر تسمح لإسرائيل بتشكيل المرحلة الأولى من الشريط العازل الذي تطمح إليه، بعد فشل إقناع الروس والأميركيين بالضغط على الجيش وحلفائه بالابتعاد عن الحدود مسافة 40 كلم، علماً بأن إسرائيل لا تزال تمارس ضغوطها الدبلوماسية على دول أوروبا الغربية لمساعدتها في نيل هذا المطلب، في مقابل تهديدها بالحرب، مستخدمةً ذريعة وجود حزب الله والحرس الثوري الإيراني على مقربة من الحدود.

رابعاً، والأهم، وهو أن إسرائيل لا تستهدف حضر فحسب، بل تحريك «الملفّ الدرزي» بشكل عام، في سياق عملها الدؤوب لتفكيك بنية المجتمع السوري وامتداداته اللبنانية والفلسطينية؛ فإسرائيل تعمل منذ سنوات على قاعدة «العصا والجزرة» مع حضر، أي إنها تهدّد حضر بالإرهابيين ثمّ تطرح جيشها كحامٍ للبلدة الملاصقة لقرى الجولان المحتلّ: مجدل شمس، بقعاثا، عين قنيا ومسعدة، التي تسعى إسرائيل إلى دفعها أيضاً إلى التخلّي عن الهويّة السورية والانخراط في مؤسسات الكيان المحتلّ، عبر الانتخابات المحليّة والخدمة المدنية والعسكرية في جيش الاحتلال وجهاز الشرطة، بما يمهّد للسيطرة القانونية على الجولان المحتل واستخدام أوراق القوّة هذه في أي مفاوضات مقبلة مع سوريا. وقد سمع أهالي حضر ومشايخها صراحةً من «أدوات» إسرائيل في فلسطين المحتلّة، لا سيّما وزير الاتصالات في حكومة بنيامين نتنياهو أيوب قرّة والشيخ موفّق طريف، بالعروض الإسرائيلية «المغرية»، والتي تتضمّن نقل الشريط الحدودي مع الأراضي المحتلة من خلف حضر إلى أمامها، وضمّها إلى الجولان المحتلّ.

تسعى إسرائيل لتحريك «الملفّ الدرزي» وتفكيك المجتمع السوري بعد الفشل في السويداء

وبينما تهوّل إسرائيل بنيّتها مدّ المنطقة العازلة في الجنوب السوري حتى السويداء، يعمل قرّة وطريف على فتح خطوط اتصال بفعاليات ومشايخ دروز لإغرائهم بالعمل لمصلحة إسرائيل، والتمرّد على الدولة السورية، بعد أن فشلت «الخلايا الأمنية» العاملة لحساب إسرائيل في السويداء في تخريب أمن المحافظة وإحداث فتنة بين الدولة السورية والأهالي. وكان ردّ أهالي حضر واضحاً بالتأكيد على انتمائهم لسوريا ووقوفهم إلى جانب الجيش والقيادة السورية، لتدفع حضر ضريبة هذا الموقف أكثر من مئة شهيد طوال سنوات الحرب.

تفاصيل الهجوم

عند الساعة الخامسة والنصف من فجر أمس، بدأت المجموعات الإرهابية هجوماً عنيفاً على حضر، بقيادة غرفتي عمليات «جيش محمد» بقيادة «جبهة النصرة» و«جبل الشيخ» بقيادة فصائل من «الجيش الحرّ» على رأسها «جبهة ثوّار سوريا»، بهدف معلن هو «فكّ الحصار عن حرمون». وانطلق الهجوم من ثلاثة محاور: الأوّل من شمال غرب البلدة، حيث انطلق المسلّحون من «تلة البلاطة الصفرة» الملاصقة لمراصد العدو الإسرائيلي على سفح جبل الشيخ باتجاه موقع «تل قرص النفل» (لا يُعدّ الموقع خط تماس مع الجماعات المسلحة، بل يتداخل مباشرة مع الأراضي المحتلة)، المحور الثاني من شرق البلدة عبر تل أحمر الشمالي باتجاه «تلة الهرة»، والمحور الثالث وهدفه المشاغلة، من جنوب البلدة عبر موقع «الدلافة» في الأحراج الفاصلة بين حضر وجباتا الخشب. وبالتزامن مع الهجوم العنيف، تسللت عربة مفخخة يقودها انتحاري (أبو عبد الرحمن ــ بيت جن) من نقطة تحتلها الجماعات الإرهابية وكانت تتبع لقوات «الأندوف»، عبر طريق ترابي من شمال شرق حضر، وانفجرت في الحي الشمالي، مخلّفةً 9 شهداء وعدداً كبيراً من الجرحى. ولم يعد خافياً استخدام إسرائيل للأراضي المحتلّة لنقل الإرهابيين من جنوب حضر إلى النقاط المقابلة لها، وسجّل خلال الأسابيع الماضية أكثر من حادثة، أولاها نقل مجموعة كبيرة من المسلّحين قبل نحو أسبوعين للمشاركة في معارك جبل الشيخ، عبر معبر بير عجم، وتكرّر الأمر قبل أيام عبر إدخال حوالى 130 مسلّحاً من المعبر ذاته، تمركزوا شمال حضر، استعداداً للهجوم، فضلاً عن الاجتماعات التي عقدها قادة المسلحين مع ضباط جيش الاحتلال في مرصد جبل الشيخ خلال هذا الأسبوع،

لا سيّما العميل إياد كمال، الملقّب بمورو، والذي استحصل على كميات كبيرة من السلاح من الاحتلال الأسبوع الماضي.
ومع ساعات الظهر، كان الجيش واللجان الشعبية ومجموعات «نسور الزوبعة» التابعة للحزب السوري القومي الاجتماعي ومجموعات من «سرايا التوحيد» (التابعة لحزب التوحيد العربي برئاسة الوزير السابق وئام وهّاب) والدفاع الوطني، قد تمكّنت من امتصاص الهجوم، واستعادت غالبية النقاط التي خسرتها، عدا «تلة الهرّة» التي استمرت الاشتباكات فيها حتى ساعات متأخرة. وفيما انخفضت وتيرة المعارك، لم ينته وجود مؤشّرات على نيّة المسلحين تكرار الهجوم، خصوصاً بعد وصول مجموعات إرهابية أخرى للمشاركة في الهجوم، من خارج غرفتي العمليّات، مثل «فرقة أحرار نوى» و«جند الأقصى/ اليادودة»، ومسلّحين من طفس والمزيريب وتل شهاب، بقيادة «الأمير العسكري» الإرهابي أبو حذافة الحمصي إلى منطقة «مثلث الموت» القريبة من المعارك. في المقابل، حشد الجيش قوّات إضافية من الفرقة الرابعة وفوج الجولان ومجموعات من «نسور الزوبعة» و«الحرس القومي العربي»، فضلاً عن مجموعات أخرى من السويداء وجرمانا وصحنايا.

«الصحوة» الجنبلاطية

هي المرّة العاشرة ربّما التي يشنّ فيها الإرهابيون هجوماً عنيفاً على حضر بدعم وتوجيه إسرائيليين. إلّا أن النائب وليد جنبلاط، الذي كان يطالب أهالي حضر في الماضي بفتح الطريق أمام الإرهابيين للانقضاض على مواقع الجيش السوري، اختار «الاستفاقة» هذه المرّة، تماشياً مع تموضعه السياسي الجديد، مغرّداً بالقول: «يا لها من لعبة إسرائيلية خبيثة بفتح السياج الفاصل وتسهيل مهمّة مجموعة سورية لمهاجمة قرية حضر»، وتوجّه إلى أهالي حضر بالقول: «إياكم التصديق بأن إسرائيل ومن يناديها قد تساعدكم. توحّدوا واتّكلوا على أنفسكم فقط، وعلى كل دعم عربي مخلص متجرّد». ولم يوضح جنبلاط ما هو هذا «الدعم العربي المخلص المتجرّد»، ربّما حتى لا يذكر الجيش السوري أو حزب الله، وتأكيداً على أنه ليس الحرس الثوري الإيراني. وكأن هناك جيوشاً سعوديّة أو أردنية ستأتي لنجدة حضر وأهلها من الإرهابيين ذاتهم، المدعومين من الخليج وإسرائيل، الآن، وفي الماضي، وعشية 15 آذار 2011.

وفيما نعى «حزب التوحيد العربي» خمسة شهداء سقطوا بسبب التفجير الانتحاري ومعارك أمس، هم مجد كبول، إسماعيل حسون، غيث ركاب، ميلاد ركاب وناصر حلاوي، عقد رئيس الحزب الديموقراطي النائب طلال أرسلان مؤتمراً صحافيّاً، شكر فيه الرئيس السوري بشّار الأسد والأمين العام لحزب الله السيد حسن نصرالله على متابعتهما الدقيقة لمعارك حضر، متوجّهاً إلى أهالي البلدة بالعزاء بالشهداء وبالتهنئة على إفشال الهجوم الإرهابي ومنع إسرائيل من تحقيق أهدافها.

ردود الفعل تُحرج إسرائيل

لم يتأخر أهالي قرى الجولان المحتلّ بالتوجّه نحو الشريط الشائك الفاصل عن بلدة حضر تلبية لنداء أقاربهم السوريين، الذين تعرّضوا للهجوم من الإرهابيين، محاولين فك الشريط والعبور نحو منطقة الاشتباكات، وسط انتشار كثيف لجنود الاحتلال وقوات شرطة الجليل. وعلى الرغم من إعلان الاحتلال بلدة مجدل شمس ومحيطها منطقة عسكرية مغلقة، نجح المئات من أهالي بلدات يركا والبقيعه والمغار في الجليل في الوصول إلى المجدل، وسط غضبٍ عارم بسبب دعم إسرائيل للإرهابيين. وبدل أن يطالب أهالي الجولان والجليل بالحماية الإسرائيلية لحضر، انقلب السحر على الساحر، وعبّر الشيخ علي المعدّي عن حال أهالي الجولان والجليل، مطالباً بالحشد البشري على الحدود، وداعياً الجنود الدروز الذين يؤدّون الخدمة الإلزامية في جيش الاحتلال إلى ترك الجيش والانضمام إلى أقاربهم بسبب تغطية إسرائيل للإرهابيين، في الهجوم على حضر. وقد سبّب الغضب الشعبي إحراجاً كبيراً لقادة جيش الاحتلال ولنوّاب الكنيست الدروز وللشيخ طريف، ما دفع الناطق باسم جيش الاحتلال أفيخاي أدرعي إلى التغريد أكثر من مرّة عن أن إسرائيل لا تدعم الإرهابيين، وكذلك الأمر بالنسبة إلى نتنياهو الذي اضطر إلى إعلان موقفٍ من لندن يتنصّل فيه من دعم الإرهابيين ويغري طائفة الموحّدين الدروز بدعمه لها. كذلك الأمر، اضطر النائب في الكنيست أكرم حسّون إلى الإدلاء بتصريحات تلوم إسرائيل على دعمها للإرهابيين، مشيراً إلى أن أربعة من ضحايا حضر هم من عائلته نفسها. وانسحب التوتّر أيضاً على قرى جبل الشيخ اللبنانية في قضاءي راشيا وحاصبيا، التي تابع أهلها مجريات المعارك بقلق شديد على أقاربهم في المقلب السوري.

استياء أردني

لا يزال «جيش خالد بن الوليد» المحسوب على تنظيم «داعش» يفرض سيطرته على منطقة حوض اليرموك جنوب غرب درعا، على الحدود مع الجولان المحتلّ ومع شمالي الأردن. وعلى الرغم من المعارك العديدة التي خاضتها فصائل «الجيش الحرّ» و«جبهة النصرة» ضدّ التنظيم، والحديث عن معارك مشتركة بين الفصائل والأردنيين وإسرائيل للسيطرة على منطقة الحوض، إلّا أن التنظيم أعاد ترتيب نفسه، بعد سلسلة ضربات جويّة إسرائيلية وأردنية قضت على غالبية قيادات الصّف الأول فيه وعدد من «الأمراء» العامّين والشرعيين. ويقود التنظيم الآن المدعو أبو علي الأسير وكارم المصري (أمير عسكري) وأمير مصري آخر كان من المفترض أن يتسلّم القيادة من الأسير، ويتولّى أبو أسامة قصيبة القضاء الشرعي، وأبو يوسف الأنخلي مكتب الخدمات. وبحسب المعلومات، فإن أحوال التنظيم الماديّة جيّدة رغم الحصار، ويقوم بتبديل مقارّه بشكل أسبوعي خوفاً من الضربات الجويّة. إلّا أن التنظيم استطاع إدخال حوالى 50 مسلّحاً جديداً من خارج الحوض، بينهم تونسيان وعدد من النساء اللواتي يعملن في «نشر الدعوة». وعلمت «الأخبار» أن هناك غضباً أردنياً من الفصائل المسلّحة التي لم تستطع تحقيق أي تقدّم ضد «داعش»، بعد مدّها بالأسلحة وبكاسِحَتَي ألغام، وأن الأردنيين مستاؤون لشعورهم بأن «إسرائيل» تمدّ «داعش» بمقوّمات الحياة لإطالة أمد وجوده والاستفادة منه لاحقاً، فيما يشكّل وجوده في هذه المنطقة خطراً كبيراً على الداخل الأردني.

“الاخبار”

مقالات أخرى لفراس الشوفي:


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!