Uprooted Palestinians are at the heart of the conflict in the M.E Palestinians uprooted by force of arms. Yet faced immense difficulties have survived, kept alive their history and culture, passed keys of family homes in occupied Palestine from one generation to the next.
There are many reasons why Belgium has become a hotbed of "radical Islamism". Some of the answers may lie in the implanting of Saudi Salafist preachers in the country from the 1960s.
Keen to secure oil contracts, Belgium's King Baudouin made an offer to Saudi King Faisal, who had visited Brussels in 1967: Belgium would set up a mosque in the capital, and hire Gulf-trained clerics.
At the time, Belgium was encouraging Moroccan and Turkish workers to come into the country as cheap labor. The deal between the two Kings would make the mosque their main place of worship.
Brussels already had the perfect place. An oriental pavilion designed by Belgian architect Ernest Van Humbeek had been built in the capital's Cinquantenaire park in 1879, but was falling into disuse. The 1967 deal gave the Saudis a 99-year, rent-free lease. The pavilion was refashioned by the Saudis, opening in 1978 as the Great Mosque of Brussels, as well as the seat of the Islamic and Cultural Centre of Belgium [ICC].Although the mosque was treated as the official voice of Muslims in Belgium, its extremist teachings came from a very different tradition to the Islam of the new immigrants. Today, there are around 600,000 people of Moroccan and Turkish origin in Belgium, a country of 11 million.
"The Moroccan community comes from mountainous regions and rift valleys, not the desert. They come from the Maliki school of Islam, and are a lot more tolerant and open than the Muslims from other regions like Saudi Arabia," says George Dallemagne, a Belgian member of parliament for the centre-right CDH, an opposition party. "However, many of them were re-"Islamified" by the Salafist clerics and teachers from the Great Mosque. Some Moroccans were even given scholarships to study in Medina, in Saudi Arabia."
Dallemagne says the Salafist clerics have tried to undermine attempts by Moroccan immigrants to integrate into Belgium. "We like to think Saudi Arabia is an ally and friend, but the Saudis are always engaged in double-talk: they want an alliance with the West when it comes to fighting Shias in Iran, but nonetheless have a conquering ideology when it comes to their religion in the rest of the world," he said.
Dallemagne has sponsored many resolutions in the Belgian parliament aimed at loosening ties with Saudi Arabia, and reducing the Salafist influence in Belgium. "We can't have a dialogue with countries that want to destabilize us," he says. "The problem is that it is only recently that authorities are finally opening their eyes to this."
The mosque has sought to send a strong message opposing the latest attacks, with Mohamed Ndiaye, one of the center's imams, releasing a statement in the aftermath: "We would like to express our deep sorrow over the Paris attacks. Our thoughts are with the people of Paris and the victims' families."
But the mosque remains a concern for the Belgian government: in August, a WikiLeaks cable revealed that a staff member of the Saudi embassy in Belgium was expelled years ago over his active role in spreading the extreme so-called Takfiri dogma.
The cable - between the Saudi King and his Home Minister - referred to Belgian demands that the ICC's Saudi director, Khalid Alabri, should leave the country, saying that his messages were far too extreme, and that his status as director meant he should not be preaching anyway.
Foreword by The Saker: I wanted to share with you a remarkable moment on Russian TV. During the talkshow Special Correspondent Charles Bausman, Editor and Publisher of Russia Insider, had the courage to contradict a fellow American journalist, Michael Bohm, and denounce the propaganda the latter was spewing. Bohm, who is fluent in Russian, is known all over Russia the THE mouthpiece of US propaganda. Every time a Russian talkshow host wants to get a “typical” (i.e. “official” anddoubleplusgoodthinking) point of view on Russian TV, they invite Bohn, who never disappoints the audience with his unfailing loyalty to the US Empire’s hegemony over the planet. That day, however, Bausman showed the Russian people a totally different kind of American, one which who speaks the truth and is clearly a friend of Russia. As a result of their Soviet past, it is quite easy for Russian to differentiate between love for one’s country and loyalty to a regime. They also understand how hard it can be to make the difference between the two.
As somebody who lives in the USA I am very familiar with the manner in which the state propaganda always conflates loyalty and love for country with loyalty and love for the ruling regime and I know that Bausman showed a lot of courage for taking on a fellow American on Russian TV. There is a Russian saying, “Один праведник спасает город” (one righteous man saves the city). That evening, Bausman ‘saved’ the USA.
YouTube prevents me from uploading this video on some stupid copyright reason. So I uploaded on RuTube. If you understand Russian, just watch the video, if not, the translated script is provided below.
Special Correspondent show from March 16, 2016 “Mission accomplished”
(TV Channel Russia)
Transcript:
Evgenii Popov (host): Charles, listening to Michael, one gets an impression that we almost had to make a decision (to withdraw forces from Syria – translator’s note). Michael seems to see it that way. What do you think?
Charles Bausman (American journalist, Chief editor of Russia Insider): Absolutely not. I want to explain to the audience and guests that although I am an American, do not think that all Americans support what their government is doing. America is always referred to as some kind of a monolith. This is absolutely not true. We are all different, and there are many different opinions as we can see.
Evgenii Popov: This is your state policy, Charles, and we are taking it as a guide.
Charles Bausman: There are also different groups there that oppose each other quite strongly . . .
Evgenii Popov: What is your opinion about the events?
Charles Bausman: There is no doubt that Russia won a fantastic victory, diplomatic, military, informational, as well as political. Michael, when you are defending the positions of those terrorists that were killing children and committed atrocities in Syria, as an American, I am ashamed. I do not understand how you can sleep at night with such views?
Michael Bohm (American journalist): I sleep quite well.
Evgenii Popov: I understand. Please, Michael, let him finish.
Michael Bohm: I expected this from Koulikov. Usually, Koulikov says something like that.
Dmitrii Koulikov (a well-known Russian political analyst): I have told him that already, Charles.
Charles Bausman: I am very glad that I am the last one to speak because I have heard everything that was said before, and have some criticism to express regarding your position, my dear Russian friends. I think Dmitrii (Koulikov) was the closest to the truth when he asked who supports these terrorists. Irina Petrovna (Yarovaya – member of the Russian Parliament (Duma); Head of the Duma committee for security and against corruption – translator’s note) and Gennady Andreevich (Zuganov – Head of the Communist Party of Russia; Head of the communist fraction in Duma – translator’s note) said that our chief enemy is the terrorists, and that we have won a major victory against the terrorists. But they are nobodies; they are a small gang of bandits that would not have been able to achieve anything if they had not received massive support from the USA. Yes, from the USA, Michael, from your country, our country.
You have to understand that your enemy is not some terrorists, which are just bums in the desert, like there are bums in poor countries, but very powerful, very rich people waging a war against you. So, I think you have been all too polite here.
Farcical peace talks accomplished nothing so far, chances for conflict resolution virtually nil.
On Sunday, Assad urged Arab and Islamic world unity in fighting terrorism. Syrians are combatting this scourge on behalf of all its people, confident of eventual victory, he stressed.
Longterm struggle continues. Syrian UN envoy/chief peace talks negotiator Bashar al-Jaafari resisted pressure by Steffan de Mistura, proximity talks go-between, serving Western, not Syrian interests.
Al-Jaafari blasted Security Council members and other rogue states supporting terrorism.
When it’s “active in Syria against Syrians, they call it moderate opposition,” he said. No such elements exist. “(T)hey are all terrorist groups,” the scourge government forces aim to eliminate, grateful for continued Russian help.
According to al-Jaafari, his delegation received no response or concrete proposal for a “political solution to the crisis.”
US/Saudi backed terrorist groups representing the opposition want regime change, Syrian sovereignty destroyed, the rights and welfare of its people ignored - why talks are going nowhere.
Syria’s delegation has “a moral and political obligation” to end bloodshed, al-Jaafari explained. “But we cannot do it alone. There are countries involved in supporting terrorism.”
It’s well-known what’s “happening on the Syrian-Turkish border and in Golan, and the way Israel is tending to the injured Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists and treating them in its hospitals, with Qatar paying the bill.”
Endless war continues. Washington rejected Russia’s call for an emergency meeting on continued ceasefire violations. Putin’s patience has limits.
According to Russian General Staff’s main operations head Sergey Rudskoy, Moscow will use military force against ceasefire violators beginning March 22 - once “proof of systematic violations of obligations” is verified.
A Russian Foreign Ministry statement said Moscow doesn’t rule out “resort(ing) to the unilateral termination of actions of the gunmen who fail to honor the ceasefire.”
Washington rejects establishing a “joint mechanism” for exchanging information on violations, punishing violators appropriately.
“(A) wrong signal is sent to the opposition members who did not join the ceasefire (nor) dissociate themselves from well-known terrorist groups properly,” Russia’s Foreign Ministry said.
Civilians are dying daily. “Foot-dragging” on establishing rules for responding to ceasefire violations is “unacceptable,” Rudskoy stressed.
Russia will act on it own if US obstructionism continues. Both countries have opposite objectives. Putin wants diplomatic conflict resolution. Obama intends endless war.
The footage released by B’Tselem. It was recorded on Thursday morning during an incident in the Tel Rumeida district of the southern West Bank city. It shows the immediate aftermath of an attack in which an Israeli soldier was wounded by two Palestinian freedom fighters
I have lived in Brussels for 21 years but never considered this city as my home — until Donald Trump insulted it.
By describing Brussels as a “hellhole” because of its sizeable Muslim population, Trump was attacking my friends and neighbors. Trump was attacking people like the cheerful Syrian I see almost every day; his daughter is in the same class as mine.
As it happens, my Syrian acquaintance was the last person I saw as I left the school on Tuesday morning. A short while later, I received a text message from my wife, telling me about the explosions. She had made it safely to work, thank God. On the way, she had traveled through Maalbeek metro station, just minutes before a bomb went off there.
We don’t yet know the identities of all the people killed. We do know, however, that they belonged to a mixture of ethnicities and nationalities. They spoke different languages. Some were probably religious, others not.
In short, they represented the thing that I like most about my adopted hom
Donald Trump’s first reaction to the attacks was to claim vindication for his “hellhole” comments. Once again, he was displaying his bigotry. The wannabe president will use any opportunity to whip up fear.
Hellhole?
It shouldn’t be necessary to spell this out but I will. Muslims in Brussels contribute massively to the city’s multicultural spirit. They help to make Brussels vibrant and convivial, the very antithesis of a hellhole. The men who carried out this week’s attacks did not enjoy any mandate from their community. Insisting, as bigots do, that Muslims prove their abhorrence for these crimes is profoundly ignorant.
Unfortunately, the Muslim community is suffering because of that ignorance. When it emerged that the Paris attacks last November had been planned in Brussels, large numbers of police and soldiers were deployed on the streets of this city. I have witnessed incidents where young men have been harassed by the police in recent months. There was no indication that the young men were doing anything illegal. As far as I could see, they were hassled solely for being Muslim.
The usual response to these kinds of atrocities is that think tanks publish pamphlets about how to deal with “radicalization.” The think tank analysts rarely grapple with the causes of terror or seek to understand it (and, as Frank Barat wrote in a new essay, understanding is never the same as condoning). Accepting that imperialism might be at fault is something of a taboo for such analysts, many of whom have their “research” funded by corporations and Western governments.
Right to anger
The residents of Brussels have every right to be angry about what has happened this week. We should certainly demand that the authorities do everything they can to apprehend the suspects. But we should not accept that Muslims may be bullied and stigmatized.
Let’s direct our anger at the small number of people who have set the Middle East ablaze. The terror of Islamic State is a direct consequence of war declared against Iraq in 2003. If it wasn’t for that illegal invasion, there would not have been an attack on Brussels on Tuesday, or Istanbul on Saturday or Baghdad last month.
Two men were ultimately responsible for the invasion and destruction of Iraq: George W. Bush, then the US president, and Tony Blair, then the British prime minister. Why are they still at large?
Most of the messages sent to the people of Brussels this week were heartfelt and appreciated. A few, however, were cynical. One was contemptible; it came from Israel.
The Israeli government as a whole claimed it “stands with Brussels.” As a resident of Brussels, I refuse that solidarity.
Ofir Akunis, the Israeli science minister, tried to play politics. He suggested the attacks occurred because, rather than fighting terrorism, Europe was too busy placing labels on goods from Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.
His comments are too inane to merit a detailed rebuttal. And besides, the labeling to which he referred is an initiative taken by the political elite. Many ordinary Europeans have gone beyond demanding labels: they are too busy boycotting all Israeli goods and campaigning against companies who seek to profit from the occupation.
We shall remain busy. The most fitting tribute to victims of violence is to tackle its root causes. That means fighting imperialism, bigotry and inequality. It means defending multiculturalism, a beautiful idea that Israel has rejected
An Open Letter to the Massachusetts State House… #BDS
From the Massachusetts Freedom to Boycott Coalition
“Non violence is a powerful and just weapon. It is a weapon unique in history, which cuts without wounding…It is a sword that heals.”
– Martin Luther King, Jr., ‘Why We Can’t Wait,’ 1963
The Massachusetts Freedom to Boycott Coalition asks the Massachusetts legislature to heed Dr. King’s words as they consider upcoming anti-boycott legislation. While the bill’s text is not yet available, its intention is similar to that of dozens of other anti-boycott bills introduced into state legislatures across the country: to curb Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS), a peaceful and legitimate strategy for leveraging consumer and constituent power to persuade Israel to comply with international law and to respect Palestinian human rights.
The US Supreme Court ruled in 1982 in NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. that boycotts intended to effect political, social or economic change are protected by the First Amendment. Such boycotts have been essential tools in US movements for civil rights, labor, the environment, and the struggle against South African Apartheid. As grassroots groups building stronger Massachusetts communities, we are concerned that anti-boycott legislation is not only an unconstitutional violation of free speech, but a threat to our right to organize.
We urge Massachusetts lawmakers to respect constituents who – like growing numbers of Americans across the country – recognize the capacity of boycotts to bring about positive change in Palestine/Israel and the rest of the world as it is forged into Dr. King’s healing sword.
Alliance for a Secular and Democratic South Asia
American Friends Service Committee – Cambridge
Arlington Street Church – Social Action Committee
Better Future Project
Bill of Rights Defense Committee
Black and Pink
Boston Alliance for Water Justice
Boston Climate Action Network
Boston Coalition for Palestinian Rights
Boston University Students for Justice in Palestine
Brandeis Students for Justice in Palestine
Cambridge to Bethlehem People to People Project
Cambridge United for Justice with Peace
City Life/Vida Urbana
Code Pink – Greater Boston
Code Pink – Western Massachusetts
Corporate Accountability International
Defending Dissent Foundation
Dorchester People for Peace
Executive Board & Members of United Steelworkers of America Local 8751
Faculty & Staff for Justice in Palestine at UMass Boston
Families for Justice as Healing
First Baptist Church in Jamaica Plain
Friends of Sabeel – New England
Grassroots International
Hampshire Students for Justice in Palestine
Harvard College Palestine Solidarity Committee
Intelligent Mischief
Islamic Society of Northeastern University
Jewish Voice for Peace – Boston
Jewish Voice for Peace – Western Massachusetts
Jewish Women for Justice in Israel/Palestine
Justice for Palestine at Harvard Law School
Kairos/Franklin County Justice for Palestine
Make Shift Boston
Massachusetts Global Action/Encuentro 5
Massachusetts Peace Action
Muslim Justice League
National Lawyers Guild – Massachusetts Chapter
No More Guantanamos
North Shore Coalition for Peace and Justice
Northeastern Students for Justice in Palestine
1for3.org
Palestine Advocacy Project
Palestine Israel Task Team of First Church in Cambridge, Congregational, UCC
Peace & Justice Committee of First Church in Bedford, MA Unitarian-Universalist
Project Voice, American Friends Service Committee, Massachusetts
Showing Up for Racial Justice
St. Francis and St. Theresa Catholic Worker of Worcester
Tree of Life Educational Fund
Tufts Jewish Voice for Peace
Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine
UMass Amherst Students for Justice in Palestine
United American Indians of New England
United for Justice with Peace
UUs for Justice in the Mid-East MA
Watertown Citizens for Peace, Justice and the Environment
Wellesley College Students for Justice in Palestine
March 23, 2016 (Ulson Gunnar – NEO) – The United States is very proud of the progress their SDF (Syrian Democratic Forces) have made on the battlefield in Syria’s northeastern region against IS (Islamic State). In a hearing before a US congressional committee recently, US Army generals extolled the fighting prowess of these fighters. They portrayed the fighters, mostly Kurds, to be persistent and tenacious despite suffering heavy losses, a characteristic the generals and the US in general seemed very eager to exploit.
However, looking at an actual map of the Syrian conflict, it appears that these Kurdish fighters and their allies on the battlefield are not working on behalf of the United States as the US would like to claim, but are instead coordinating with other Syrian forces fighting to reestablish stability (and more importantly, unity) within the country.
Salients emerging from Kurdish-held territory reach out in offensives into IS and “rebel” held territory, like tentacles of a leviathan to meet up with the Syrian Arab Army reaching out from their respective fronts. Together they have encircled, cut off and sent IS and other militant factions fleeing in disarray. Together, their collective efforts have finally helped turn the tide of what has been a destructive war threatening to leave Syria divided and in perpetual turmoil just as Libya was in 2011 and onward.
When Russia entered the conflict upon the request of the Syrian government, Russian forces began coordinating and supporting Kurdish fighters as well. The duality of Russian and American support behind the Kurds has become a complex issue for analysts and causal observers alike.
Illustrating just how bizarre America’s claims are regarding its “backing” of Kurdish fighters in Syria and its taking responsibility for their successes, Reuters’ article, “Kurds’ advance in Syria divides U.S. and Turkey as Russia bombs,” would even go as far as claiming:
The rapid advance of U.S.-backed Kurdish fighters in northern Syria, taking advantage of Russian air strikes to seize territory near the Turkish border, has infuriated Ankara and threatened to drive a wedge between NATO allies.
Clearly Kurdish fighters are advancing because of Russian military assistance, not American, and while Reuters claims a wedge may be driven between Turkey and the US, it has only been Russia that has attempted to hold Turkey accountable for its aggression against Syria’s Kurds, not the US.
Syria’s Kurds, at least the majority who have taken up arms, seem to understand that further division for Syria as the US clearly desires, would be a disaster, not an opportunity.
Encouragement by the United States for the Kurds to fight the Syrian government or to carve out their own autonomous, independent region would be the partial fulfillment of Washington’s “Plan B” for Syria, failing outright regime change.
While an independent Kurdish state would sound like the culmination of a long-desired dream for the Kurdish people it would be in reality the beginning of a much darker national nightmare.
Independent Kurdistan Would be the “Next Israel”
Geopolitically, an independent Kurdish state either in Syria or created out of an amalgamation of Kurdish regions in Syria and Iraq, would be many times weaker than any of the states they would be achieving independence from.
An independent Kurdistan would be incapable of defending itself from more aggressive offensives launched by Turkey who would no longer have to worry about provoking Baghdad, Damascus or their regional and international partners such as Iran and Russia. The United States, the chief agitator encouraging Kurdish independence, has already proven complete disinterest in truly protecting the Kurdish people from Turkish aggression both within Turkey’s borders and well beyond them. In fact, the US appears to be cynically using Turkish aggression as a “stick” to be held in contrast to whatever “carrots” are being offered in exchange for Washington’s tighter control over Ankara’s leash.
An independent Kurdistan would look a lot like Israel, or perhaps Qatar or Bahrain. It would be small, composing perhaps almost the same minuscule population of Israel with no more than 10 million people, and exist as a dependent faux-nation in need of constant and substantial foreign aid both militarily and economically (provided by the United States).
Image: While Israel “exists” as a nation, it does so in a state of constant belligerence, and a belligerence dependent entirely on constant funding and weapon shipments from the US and Europe. It seems very likely that any sort of Kurdish state would be created to exist under a similarly precarious existence.
Like Israel, this Kurdish state would be governed by proxies selected by Washington. Either through internal division or the constant threat of aggression from abroad, this Kurdish state, like Israel, would be plunged and intentionally left in perpetual conflict. This conflict could even be sustained by creating aggressive foreign policies like Israel has adopted, creating a “siege mentality” among the Kurdish people and justifying long-term military dependency on the US.
While Kurdish populated regions have significant oil reserves, they will be dependent on foreign corporations to extract them and like the oil barons of the Persian Gulf, revenue will be at the mercy of global markets and those special interests who control those markets.
The United States, as it has done to Israel and the Persian Gulf monarchies, would leave an independent Kurdish state in a precarious position intentionally, requiring it to depend on US backing. While Israel is often accused of being a regional bully (and it most certainly is), its menace is directly proportional to the immense financial aid and weapons it receives from the US and Europe.
Nations like Saudi Arabia which are vastly larger in territory than a potential Kurdish state would be, and double or triple its potential population, still depend on the United States for military weapons and regional protection. There is no reason to expect a Kurdish state to form under any other sort of arrangement.
Nothing Like Independence It would in fact, be nothing like independence, or even autonomy. It would be perpetual, servile dependency on the special interests that helped create it solely for the purpose of using it to further divide and diminish the influence of any one single nation state in the Middle Eastern region.
As the British did before them, the United States is an expert in Balkanizing regions, and nations within regions. What is touted as “revolution,” “freedom” and “independence” often ends up becoming decades of instability, internal conflict and dependence on the US who had sold the idea of nation-making in the first place.
And while the US promises the Kurds a utopian future state, they have simultaneously promised overlapping spheres within the region to other allies, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and even Israel. The diabolical brilliance of this arrangement allows the US to create future conflicts, divisions and weakness among all players in the region, between friends and foes alike, ensuring it alone maintains hegemony over a collection of infighting subordinates.
A Better Path for Syria’s Kurds
Both Damascus and Syria’s Kurds benefit from a strong, unified Syria. While Syria’s Kurds may desire and even seek greater representation or autonomy, their place within the Syrian state is both an asset for Damascus and Damascus an asset for the Kurds.
Turkey currently constitutes a common enemy. Syrian soldiers and Kurds alike have suffered the effects of Turkish aggression, both directly through armed aggression ordered by Ankara, and indirectly through the ongoing proxy war Syrian soldiers and Kurdish fighters are entrenched in against waves of foreign-backed fighters.
While Syria’s Kurds are suffering greatly because of Turkey today, they do not stand a chance against Ankara’s aggression tomorrow as an independent state without Damascus and its obligation to defend all within its borders, including Kurdish regions targeted by Turkey.
The same could be said for Kurds in Iraq, who have been lured away from Baghdad and in league with the United States, inebriated with promises of riches and power after establishing their own state. Perhaps as a preview for Syria’s Kurds to consider, as the schism between Baghdad and Iraq’s Kurds grows, Baghdad becomes increasingly unable and perhaps even unwilling to marshal forces to protect their northernmost region against Turkish incursions leaving the Kurds at their mercy with only the US and its various layers of machinations to depend on.
And just in case Baghdad did want to prove its commitment to Iraqi Kurds, they likely couldn’t as they desperately find themselves fighting IS on all fronts. A divided Iraq faces many years of fighting and instability, fighting and instability that will steal from Kurds and Arabs alike a peaceful and prosperous future.
Considering this, we see yet another geopolitical dimension in the use of IS by the US and its regional allies, using it as a means to apply pressure directly against its enemies and create tensions in parallel between potential alliances that could strengthen the region.
Image: Libya still remains divided and infighting to this day. Those in Syria should consider this carefully before buying into US promises of a “democratic” tomorrow or a nation of one’s own. What good is a nation of one’s own that is engulfed in the flames of perpetual war?
The deconstruction of Iraq (or even Libya) should serve as a warning to all in the region the danger of taking up arms against their own government and inviting the sort of chaos Syria is now steeped in. Nations like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain who depend entirely on the US and Europe for their continued existence should also serve as a warning for those in a position to establish their own independent state, that while the promises made by the US sound tempting, reality manifest clearly is not.
Ulson Gunnar, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
Hizbullah Secretary General His Eminence Hassan Nasrallah threatened the apartheid “Israeli” entity that any aggression against Lebanon will be very costly.
In an interview with al-Mayadeen channel, Sayyed Nasrallah congratulated all the mothers on the Mother’s Day holiday. “We particularly congratulate the martyrs’, the wounded and the prisoners as well as the defenders of our country’s mothers.”
No Limits, Red Lines…
On the “Israeli” threats against Lebanon, His Eminence ruled out a war with “Israel”.
“The Zionists do not launch a war without an American green light,” he said, pointing out that “Obama’s administration gives the permission to a war.”
However, His Eminence ruled out a close war. “The most important subject is the factor of adventure. Any war on Lebanon is a major adventure and its consequences may be unknown to the US.”
In response to the Arab’s position from any coming war, the Resistance Leader highlighted that “if the “Israeli” wants to go to war, it won’t take the official Arab regimes permission. However, some Arabs work for “Israel”.”
Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah revealed that “if a war breaks out with “Israel”, we will fight with no limits, ceilings, or red lines.”
“The “Israeli” knows very well that Hizbullah possesses rockets that can strike any position in the occupied Palestinian territories,” he went on to say, and noted that “”Israel” is keen on the lives of its settlers and this is a point that can be exploited.”
Watch Your Nuclear Sites
His Eminence further acknowledged that “the “Israelis” know that the Resistance possesses effective missile that can hit any point in occupied Palestine.It is our religious and natural right to strike any target in occupied Palestine to repulse any “Israeli” aggression. We have a full list of chemical plants, reactors and warehouses and where they are … “Israel’s” Iron Dome won’t help it.”
“Through its readiness, expertise, military skills and stance, the Resistance has made the “Israelis” realize that any war on Lebanon will be very costly and that they must balance between feasibility and cost,” he cautioned.
In parallel, Sayyed Nasrallah stated: “What is ironic is that “Israel” possesses nuclear weaponry and some parties criticize the Resistance if it tries to obtain defensive weapons.”
In this context, His Eminence sent a clear message to Tel Aviv: “The “Israeli” must expect anything from the Resistance and mustn’t miscalculate the repercussions of any coming war.”
“I will not disclose what weapons the resistance has, but it is the right of the Resistance, Lebanese Army and people, and the armies of the region to possess weapons that enable them to defend their existence and sovereignty …”
He also wondered: “How can Netanyahu have the right to possess a nuclear weapon while we don’t have the right to possess a defensive weapon?”
“The nuclear plants in the Zionist entity are present either inside or near the cities,” he threatened, noting that “if “Israel” destroys our homes, it is our legitimate right to strike any target in occupied Palestine as a possible form of deterrence.”
According to the Resistance Leader, “Since 2000, we do not tolerate any aggression. However, there are those who tolerate the violation of sovereignty in the land, sea, and air. To what extend we can remain silent?”
Commenting on the “Israeli” military drills on the Northern front, Sayyed Nasrallah viewed that these military exercises are not new … “Some think that Hizbullah is preoccupied in Syria, but we have a team that is dedicated to the “Israeli” issue and everything the “Israelis” say.”
On the possibility of a limited “Israeli” aggression, His Eminence emphasized: “If anyone in the enemy’s entity is thinking of waging a limited military operation, I tell them that they are mistaken … We will not allow the “Israelis” to impose a new equation and any step by them will be an uncalculated adventure. We will respond to any attack in a manner that protects our country and the “Israelis” must expect anything from us.”
Al-Saud’s Blacklisting
Moving to the Gulf decision to blacklist Hizbullah, Sayyed Nasrallah asserted that “the Arab label to the Resistance as terrorist forms a cover to any “Israeli” war. During the 2006 “Israeli” aggression, there existed an indirect Arab cover.”
“”Israel” does not wait for an Arab cover to wage its wars. It only weighs its interest and seeks US approval.” Moreover, he said: “It is al-Saud and not the Saudis, who labeled us as “terrorists”.”
“Saudi Arabia has a special status in the Arab League, the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the Arab world as the countries that have weight in the Arab world are being targeted. The Saudis owe the power of money, the fatwas and the influence of extremist groups,” His Eminence elaborated.
He further explained that “the Saudi regime wants to hold Hizbullah responsible for its failure in several fronts: Lebanon, Yemen, Syria, and Bahrain.”
“In Lebanon, the Saudi scheme has spent a lot of money since 2005 to eliminate the Resistance. During the 2006 war, the Saudis sought to prolong the war and we have information in this regard. We have information about the last week of negotiations at the Security Council.”
He also viewed that “the Saudi regime fears any kind of opposition even if it was by word.”
“Al-Saud started the war against Iran, and the Saudi regime worked so that a nuclear deal isn’t reached with Iran,” he announced.
Moreover, the Resistance Leader uncovered that he has information about the Saudi scheme to crush the Resistance. “However, I will not talk about its details because of local considerations. If I reveal the scheme, I will create a conflict that we don’t seek.”
Responding to the Saudi accusations of Hizbullah’s interference in Bahrain, Sayyed Nasrallah stated: “The claims that Hizbullah has armed anyone in Bahrain are false accusations. We have not sent arms to Bahrain, we have not trained anyone and we have not formed terrorist cells.”
“All accusations against Hizbullah are baseless and if the Arab League’s decision was based on this issue then it is invalid. I call on the Arab foreign and interior ministers to reevaluate these accusations,” His Eminence reiterated.
Syria and Russian Pullout
On the Syrian front, the Resistance leader recalled that “some sides were surprised by the Russian intervention in Syria, but this issue was being discussed with the Syrian and Iranian leaderships and we were in the picture of these discussions.”
“The Russian military intervention in Syria was mulled between Moscow, Tehran and Damascus for six months before taking the related decision,” he clarified, pointing out that “Moscow had intensified its military deployment in Syria in preparation for any Russian-Turkish confrontation after Turkey downed a Russian warplane.”
As he described the Russian withdrawal as “partial and semi-large”, he revealed that “Hizbullah was informed of the Russian troops’ withdrawal and we were aware of it before it happened.”
“The Russian withdrawal from Syria is partial although significant … Additional Russian reinforcements were deployed after Turkey’s downing of a Russian warplane, but the issue was contained and there is no need for the reinforcements anymore….Hizbullah, Syria, Iran and Russia are in one position and stance regarding the Syrian crisis,” His Eminence declared.
He went on to say: “A sufficient Russian air force is still catering to the requirements of the battlefield in Syria and Putin has announced that additional air forces can be sent within hours if needed.”
To Be Where We Should Be
Describing all the talk of Hizbullah’s withdrawal from Syria in the wake of Russia’s pullout as “baseless”, His Eminence stressed that his party’s presence these is linked to a specific goal.
“We are contributing to preventing the fall of Syria into the hands of Daesh, al-Nusra (Front) and the takfiri groups,” he said, affirming that “Hizbullah went there for this goal and as long as this objective needs us, we will be where we should be.” He further announced that the Resistance is capable of sending more forces but we are not seeking a military solution.
“We want to curb the bloodshed and we want the opposition to achieve some of its legitimate demands,” he added, warning that “if Syria falls, Lebanon will also fall [into the hands of Daesh and Nusra]. As long as this aim has not been achieved, we will be where we should.”
According to Sayyed Nasrallah, “The Americans realized that their mission in Syria is impossible, which pushed the other party to the political solution. The US acknowledged that the alternative in Syria is Daesh [Arabic Acronym for the terrorist “ISIL” group] and al-Nusra Front if the government was toppled in Syria.”
“The US wants a political solution that serves its goals and the goals of its allies. This goal is regime change and controlling Syria to turn it into a subordinate state,” he cautioned.
KSA Blocking Solution in Syria
Meanwhile, Sayyed Nasrallah accused Saudi Arabia and Turkey of “disrupting any progress” in the ongoing negotiations between the Syrian government and the opposition aimed at ending five years of war in the Arab country.
“What is disrupting any progress toward a political solution is firstly Saudi Arabia, and secondly Turkey,” he said, noting that “the Saudi continues to set obstacles and does not want a political solution in Syria. May be they are waiting for a new American administration, but I do not expect the success of a political solution now.”
On this level, the Resistance Leader insisted: “The political solution must not be imposed on the Syrians by the foreign forces. The Turks might be more realistic than the Saudis regarding the precondition of Syrian President Bashar Assad’s departure. Saudi Arabia is the party blocking the political solution in Syria.”
In addition, His Eminence emphasized that President al-Assad does not represent himself but rather a broad category of the Syrian people. “Syria’s allies will not accept his departure and the solution is to reach a settlement, but not through elimination or exclusion.”
On another level, Sayyed Nasrallah hailed the late iconic journalist Mohmmad Hasanein Haikal, who used to meet His Eminence whenever possible. “The aim Hizbullah delegation’s visit to Egypt was just to offer condolences over his death.”
He also called for dialogue between all parties and countries across the region.
Committed To Aoun
On the internal front, Sayyed Nasrallah showed no rejection for meeting head of the Future Party ex-PM Saad Hariri after his return to Lebanon “if the Hizbullah-Future dialogue requires such a meeting.”
However, he noted that any meeting should lead to political results.
“Our representatives are meeting and discussing all issues. Things are deadlocked regarding the issue of the presidency and the electoral law,” His Eminence explained as he voiced skepticism about such an outcome in the current period.
Noting that “there is a problem called real partnership” in the country, Sayyed Nasrallah chief emphasized that “the fair and real solution that can reflect the true sizes of all political forces would be an electoral law based on proportional representation.”
As for the presidency, Sayyed Nasrallah accused the Lebanese Forces of trying to stir a dispute between Hizbullah and the Free Patriotic Movement.
“If we head to parliament, it is known that [head of the Free Patriotic Movement] General Michael Aoun will not be elected,” he added, reiterating Hizbullah’s commitment towards Aoun.
“We have a clear commitment and as long as Aoun says he is a candidate, we will support him. We want a strong, firm president who cannot be bought with money, a president who does not bow to the power of the media or the regional and international forces.”
Asked about the nomination of the Marada Movement chief MP Suleiman Franjieh, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that the northern leader is “qualified to be a president.”
“We trust him and he is our ally and friend,” he added
Stressing the strong relation with the Amal Movement, Hizbullah Secretary General confirmed that Hizbullah’s relation with [Speaker Nabih] Berri is not based on coercion and we are ethically committed to supporting Aoun’s nomination.”
On the electoral law, Sayyed Nasrallah reiterated that the only fair electoral law is the one base on proportional representation
Threats by Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah have topped the headlines in the Zionist newspapers and websites, describing them as “unprecedented,” highlighting that they have not been escalated step by step, but have rather made a full leap.
During an interview with Beirut-based Al-Mayadeen TV on Monday, Sayyed Nasrallah threatened of striking all petrochemical, biological and nuclear sites located in the occupied territories if the Israeli army launches a war against Lebanon.
“It is true that Nasrallah ruled out that Israel would venture to go to war — which does not seem near to him — yet he left Israel with his threats to think carefully about them,” Zionist Channel 2 said.
Ruling out the possibility of any Zionist war against Lebanon in the short term, his eminence noted that the entity does not carry out any military move without the American green light.
However, even though officials in Tel Aviv had commented on Sayyed Nasrallah’s threats prior to the interview, its content will be strongly discussed by the political and military decision makers in the Zionist entity.
Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General was the main headline in Yedioth Ahronoth, Maariv and Israel Today newspapers, as well as Walla website.
Source: Israeli Media
22-03-2016 – 16:37 Last updated 22-03-2016 – 16:37
Furiously throwing taxpayer money at billionaires
-
“Keir Starmer and the crisis of Britain’s extreme centre“ (Robinson):. . .
Britain, like other Western states, suffers from what one might call an
ideologi...
Hell Is Heaven For Jews
-
Hell Is Heaven For Jews June 23 2026 ___________________________________
More Vids! +BN Vids Archive! HERE! ___________________________________
Support The...
Is Rolex Quietly Retiring the GMT-Master II Pepsi?
-
Few Rolex rumors spread faster than whispers about the GMT-Master II
“Pepsi.” It happens almost every year. Someone claims production is ending,
Reddit lig...
Report on Beth Israel vigil 02-21-26
-
*Vigils continue, non-stop*
Just because we don’t get Vigil Reports out at the same rate as years'
past, we remind readers that we show up every Saturday ...
-
Hello all,
It is with great sadness that I share with you the passing of our beloved
sister, Mother, and Grandmother, the individual that you all knew ...
Best Horror Podcast
-
Best Horror Podcast Introduction: Horror podcasts […]
The post Best Horror Podcast appeared first on Copper Shock Horror Podcast.
Ikhras Endorses Muntadhar Al-Zaidi
-
“Oh parties of banditry and sectarianism and corruption, we have come and
our goal is to destroy you.” Ikhras formally endorses Muntadhar al-Zaidi,
Iraqi j...
Prince Charles: Foreign Jews behind bloodshed in ME
-
In May, 2017, British Crown Prince Charles declined an invitation from
Zionist entity’s president Reuven Rivlin‘s to attend the 100th anniversary
of the no...
Palestinian Women – One for All, All for One
-
Honouring All Palestinian Women by Honouring Three: Hanin Zoabi, Ahed
Tamimi, Samah Sabawi Vacy Vlazna “Palestinian women have always stood side
by side ...
US’s Saudi Oil Deal from Win-Win to Mega-Lose
-
By F. William Engdahl Who would’ve thought it would come to this? Certainly
not the Obama Administration, and their brilliant geo-political think-tank
neo-...
-
*Mordechai Vanunu wins human rights prize of Brazilian Press Association *
* http://www.alternativenews.org/english/index.php/features/updates/7038-mordechai...
Abdul Aziz Rantissi:
"My ultimate wish, my God, is to attain martyrdom,"...God granted him his wish on April 17, 2004, at the hands of Israeli assassins.
Uprooted Palestinian 
