Norman Finkelstein – Hezbollah, the Honour of Lebanon

“It’s better to die on your feet than
to walk crawling on your knees….
how can you not respect

those who say they would rather die on
their feet? How can YOU not respect that?”

Norman Finkelstein makes some
really good points…

Who can dispute most of this Video?
Resistance for Iraq, Afghanistan, Native People
Of North America, Other Parts of the World
Mainly Palestine….Let the Resistance Continue!

Norman Finkelstein, a Jewish American political
scientist and author, specializing in Jewish-related
issues and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular
talks about the Lebanese militia Hezbollah and
openly supports and praises their resistance: ”
They (Hezbollah) show courage, they show discipline,
I respect that”On Israeli defeat and consequential withdrawal
from Lebanon in 2000, Finkelstein says:”But the
reality was — and everyone understood it — that the
Israeli attitude was: We are going to knock out Hizbullah.
They began planning for a new war right after they
were forced to leave in 2000. They found their excuse,
their pretext, in July 2006, but there is no question
among rational people that Israel was never going
to let the Hizbullah victory go by.”
“There is no way that the United States and Israel
are going to tolerate any resistance (to their hegemony)
in the Arab world.”

On the damage caused to Lebanon as a result
of the resistance: “It’s better to die on your feet than
to walk crawling on your knees….how can I not respect
those (Hezbollah) who say they would rather die on
their feet? How can I not respect that?”

Finkelstein then goes on to slam the stances taken
by some sell out Arabs who continue to admire
George Bush like ‘Servants’ despite Bush being the
man behind the carpet bombing of Lebanon and
says that Bush should be classified as ‘persona non
grata’:”Who (would) roll out the red carpet less
than two years after your whole country was
destroyed by them (the US)? ”

“You (sell out-arabs) have NO self respect”

How Hezbollah achieved victory over Israel

Part 1: The Intelligence War
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_E…

Part 2: The Ground War
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_E…

Part 3: The Political War
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_E…

 

Advertisements

The Traitor: I was promised almost all of West Bank

Abbas: I was promised almost all of West Bank.” Angry Arab: I was promised almost all of China.
Posted by As’ad at
11:17 AM
Palestinian president tell reporters in Ramallah that Prime Minister Olmert promised to give him ‘nearly all of the West Bank and east Jerusalem neighborhoods.’ Leaders expected to meet again next week, possibly for last time

Ali Waked var agt=navigator.userAgent.toLowerCase();var is_major = parseInt(navigator.appVersion);var is_ie = ((agt.indexOf(“msie”) != -1) && (agt.indexOf(“opera”) == -1));var is_ie5 = (is_ie && (is_major == 4) && (agt.indexOf(“msie 5.0”)!=-1) );

function txt_link(type,url,urlAtts) {

switch (type){

case ‘external’ :

if( urlAtts != ” ) {var x = window.open(unescape(url),’newWin’,urlAtts)} else {document.location = unescape(url);}

break;

case ‘article’ :

urlStr = ‘/articles/0,7340,L-to_replace,00.html’;url=urlStr.replace(‘to_replace’,url);

if( urlAtts == ” !urlAtts) {document.location = url;} else {var x = window.open(url,’newWin’,urlAtts)}

break;

case ‘yaan’ :

urlStr = ‘/yaan/0,7340,L-to_replace,00.html’;url=urlStr.replace(‘to_replace’,url);

if( urlAtts == ” !urlAtts) {document.location = url;} else {var x = window.open(url,’newWin’,urlAtts)}

break;

case ‘category’ :

urlStr = ‘/home/0,7340,L-to_replace,00.html’; url=urlStr.replace(‘to_replace’,url);

if( urlAtts == ” !urlAtts) {document.location = url;} else {var x = window.open(url,’newWin’,urlAtts)}

break;

}

}

function setDbLinkCategory(url) {eval(unescape(url));}

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told reporters in Ramallah that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had promised him “almost all of the West Bank” and “nearly all of the neighborhoods of east Jerusalem,” Arab media reported Monday.

He added, however, that Olmert did not say what he meant by “almost.”

Abbas said he would be meeting with Olmert again on October 27, perhaps for the last time.

According to the Palestinian president, the talks he held recently with Syrian President Bashar Assad were sincere.

“Assad did not express his reservation over the things I presented him with in terms of the internal Palestinian issue, and he presented me with the entire situation regarding the IsraelSyria conflict.”

Abbas denied reports that he had conveyed a message to the Syrian leader from US President George W. Bush.

The Palestinian leader confirmed Monday morning’s reports that Egypt had issued invitations to the Palestinian organizations to attend talks in Cairo next month, based on early elections, a unity government, and the reestablishment of the PLO institutions and Palestinian security organizations.
He stressed that his stance remains that the Palestinians must not accept temporary agreements or “shelf agreements” with Israel. He also said he would not accept a solution of temporary borders.
The negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians focus on six main issues: Jerusalem, the borders, the settlements, the refugees, security arrangements and water.

On Sunday, Abbas criticized the Israelis for failing to protect Palestinian farmers during the olive harvest season against the settlers’ violence.

He complained about the situation to Israel and the international community, saying that “if Israel fails to take control of the situation, it means it’s not serious about attaining peace.”

************************************************************

Abbas revealed later that when he told the Democratic candidate about the Arab peace initiative – offering Israel normal relations with all 22 Arab countries in exchange for a Palestinian state – Obama’s (clearly private) response was unambiguous: “The Israelis must be crazy not to accept that.”” (And the Arabs must be crazy to propose that).
Posted by As’ad at
7:06 AM

The man who knows too much

He exposed the My Lai massacre, revealed Nixon’s secret bombing of Cambodia and has hounded Bush and Cheney over the abuse of prisoners in Abu Ghraib… No wonder the Republicans describe Seymour Hersh as ‘the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist’. Rachel Cooke meets the most-feared investigative reporter in Washington

Seymour Hersh

American investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. Photograph: Martha Camarillo

Every so often, a famous actor or producer will contact Seymour Hersh, wanting to make a movie about his most famous story: his single-handed uncovering, in 1969, of the My Lai massacre, in which an American platoon stormed a village in South Vietnam and, finding only its elderly, women and children, launched into a frenzy of shooting, stabbing and gang-raping. It won him a Pulitzer prize and hastened the end of the Vietnam war. Mostly, they come to see him in his office in downtown Washington, a two-room suite that he has occupied for the past 17 years. Do they like what they see? You bet they do, even if the movie has yet to be made. ‘Brad Pitt loved this place,’ says Hersh with a wolfish grin. ‘It totally fits the cliché of the grungy reporter’s den!’ When last he renewed the lease, he tells me, he made it a condition of signing that the office would not be redecorated – the idea of moving all his stuff was too much. It’s not hard to see why. Slowly, I move my head through 180 degrees, trying not to panic at the sight of so much paper piled so precipitously. Before me are 8,000 legal notepads, or so it seems, each one filled with a Biro Cuneiform of scribbled telephone numbers. By the time I look at Hersh again – the full panorama takes a moment or two – he is silently examining the wall behind his desk, which is grey with grime, and striated as if a billy goat had sharpened its horns on it.

And then there is Hersh himself, a splendid sight. After My Lai, he was hired by the New York Times to chase the tail of the Watergate scandal, a story broken by its rival, the Washington Post. In All the President’s Men, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein’s book about their scoop, they describe him – the competition. He was unlike any reporter they’d ever seen: ‘Hersh, horn-rimmed and somewhat pudgy, showed up for dinner in old tennis shoes, a frayed pinstriped shirt that might have been at its best in his college freshman year and rumpled, bleached khakis.’ Forty years on, little has changed. Today he is in trainers, chinos and a baggy navy sweatshirt and – thanks to a tennis injury – he is walking like an old guy: chest forward, knees bandy, slight limp in one leg. There is something cherishably chaotic about him. A fuzzy halo of frantic inquiry follows him wherever he goes, like the cloud of dust that hovers above Pig Pen in the Charlie Brown strip. In conversation, away from the restraining hand of his bosses at the New Yorker, the magazine that is now his home, his thoughts pour forth, unmediated and – unless you concentrate very hard – seemingly unconnected. ‘Yeah, I shoot my mouth off,’ he says, with faux remorse. ‘There’s a huge difference between writing and thinking.’ Not that he has much time for those who put cosy pontification over the graft of reporting: ‘I think… My colleagues! I watch ’em on TV, and every sentence begins with the words: “I think.” They could write a book called I Think.’

But we must backtrack a little. Before the office, there is the breakfast joint. Hersh and I meet at the Tabard Inn, a Washington hangout so gloomily lit I could do with a torch. He has poached eggs and coffee and ‘none of that other stuff, thanks’. (I think he means that he doesn’t want potatoes with his eggs). Like everyone in America just now, he is on tenterhooks. A Democrat who truly despises the Bush regime, he is reluctant to make predictions about exactly what is going to happen in the forthcoming election on the grounds that he might ‘jinx it’. The unknown quantity of voter racism apart, however, he is hopeful that Obama will pull it off, and if he does, for Hersh this will be a starting gun. ‘You cannot believe how many people have told me to call them on 20 January [the date of the next president’s inauguration],’ he says, with relish. ‘[They say:] “You wanna know about abuses and violations? Call me then.” So that is what I’ll do, so long as nothing awful happens before the inauguration.’ He plans to write a book about the neocons and, though it won’t change anything – ‘They’ve got away with it, categorically; anyone who talks about prosecuting Bush and Cheney [for war crimes] is kidding themselves’ – it will reveal how the White House ‘set out to sabotage the system… It wasn’t that they found ways to manipulate Congressional oversight; they had conversations about ending the right of Congress to intervene.’

In one way, it’s amazing Hersh has anything left to say about Bush, Cheney and their antics. Then again, with him, this pushing of a story on and on is standard practice. Though it was Woodward and Bernstein who uncovered the significance of the burglary at the Watergate building, Hersh followed up their scoop by becoming one of Nixon’s harshest critics and by breaking stories about how the government had supported Pinochet’s 1973 coup in Chile, secretly bombed Cambodia and used the CIA to spy on its domestic enemies. His 1983 book about Nixon, The Price of Power, is definitive. So far as the War on Terror goes, Hersh has already delivered his alternative history – Chain of Command, a book based on the series of stories he wrote for the New Yorker in the aftermath of 9/11 and following Bush’s invasion of Iraq. Among other things, Hersh told us of the bungled efforts to catch Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan; of the dubious business dealings of the superhawk Richard Perle – a report that led to Perle’s resignation as chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board (Hersh alleged that Perle improperly mixed his business affairs with his influence over US foreign policy when he met the Saudi arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi in 2003. Perle described Hersh as ‘the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist’ and threatened to sue before falling oddly silent); and of how Saddam’s famous efforts to buy uranium in Africa, as quoted by President Bush in his 2003 State of the Union speech, were a fiction. Most electrifying of all, however, was his triple salvo on the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib. It was Hersh who first revealed the full extent of this torture, for which he traced the ultimate responsibility carefully back to the upper reaches of the administration. ‘In each successive report,’ writes David Remnick, the editor of the New Yorker, in his introduction to Chain of Command, ‘it became clear that Abu Ghraib was not an “isolated incident” but, rather, a concerted attempt by the government and the military leadership to circumvent the Geneva Conventions in order to extract intelligence and quell the Iraqi insurgency.’ As Remnick points out, this reporting has ‘stood up over time and in the face of a president whose calumny has turned out to be a kind of endorsement’. Bush reportedly told Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, that Hersh was ‘a liar’; after the third of his reports on Abu Ghraib, a Pentagon spokesman announced that Hersh merely ‘threw a lot of crap against the wall and he expects someone to peel off what’s real. It’s a tapestry of nonsense.’

Earlier this year, Hersh turned his attention to Iran: to Bush’s desire to bomb it and to America’s covert operations there. But while Hersh believes the President would still dearly love to go after Iran, the danger of that actually happening has now passed. Events, not least the sinking of the global economy, have moved on. So he is shortly to write about Syria instead, which he has recently visited. In the dying days of the Bush administration, he says, it is noticeably easier to meet contacts – Cheney, the enforcer, is a lot less powerful – and the information he is getting is good. By coincidence, it was in Syria that he first heard about what was going on inside Abu Ghraib, long before he saw documentary evidence of it. ‘I got in touch with a guy inside Iraq during the Prague Spring after the fall of Baghdad, a two-star guy from the old regime. He came up to Damascus by cab. We talked for four days, and one of the things we talked about was prisons. He told me that some of the women inside had been sending messages to their fathers and brothers asking them to come and kill them because they’d been molested. I didn’t know whether it was GIs playing grab ass or what, but it was clear that the women had been shamed. So when I first heard about the photographs, I knew they were real. Did I think the story would be as big as it was? Yeah. But was it as big as My Lai? No.’ Only a handful of relatively lowly military personnel have so far been punished for their part in the abuse, and Colonel Janis Karpinski, the commander of the Iraqi prisons, was merely demoted (from Brigadier General), in spite of the fact that the Taguba Report, the internal US army report on detainee abuse that was leaked to Hersh, singled her out for blame. ‘And John Kerry wouldn’t even use it [Abu Ghraib] in his campaign. He didn’t want to offend the military, I assume.’

Four decades separate My Lai and Abu Ghraib. You have to ask: wasn’t it appalling for him to be investigating US army abuses of civilians all over again? Didn’t he think that lessons might have been learnt? Yes, and no. It made him feel ‘hopeless’, but on the other hand, war is always horrible. In 1970, after his My Lai story, he addressed an anti-war rally and, on the spur of the moment, asked a veteran to come up and tell the crowd what some soldiers would do on their way home after a day spent moving their wounded boys. With little prompting, the traumatised vet described how they would buzz farmers with their helicopter blades, sometimes decapitating them; they would then clean up the helicopter before they landed back at base. ‘That’s what war is like,’ he says. ‘But how do you write about that? How do you tell the American people that?’ Still, better to attempt to tell people than to stay feebly silent. What really gets Hersh going – he seems genuinely bewildered by it – is the complicit meekness, the virtual collapse, in fact, of the American press since 9/11. In particular, he disdains its failure to question the ‘evidence’ surrounding Saddam’s so-called weapons of mass destruction. ‘When I see the New York Times now, it’s so shocking to me. I joined the Times in 1972, and I came with the mark of Cain on me because I was clearly against the war. But my editor, Abe Rosenthal, he hired me because he liked stories. He used to come to the Washington bureau and almost literally pat me on the head and say: “How is my little Commie today? What do you have for me?” Somehow, now, reporters aren’t able to get stories in. It was stunning to me how many good, rational people – people I respect – supported going into war in Iraq. And it was stunning to me how many people thought you could go to war against an idea.’

As for the troop ‘surge’ and its putative success, he more or less rolls his eyes when I bring this up. ‘People are saying quietly that they are worried about Iraq. This is nothing profound, but by the time the surge got going, ethnic cleansing had already happened in a lot of places. There was a natural lull in the violence. The moment we start withdrawing, and relying on the Shia to start paying members of the Awakening [the alliance of Sunni insurgents whose salaries were initially paid by the US military, and who have helped to reduce violence in some provinces]…’ His voice trails off. ‘And the big bad bogeyman is Saudi Arabia. There’s an awful lot of money going to Salafist and Wahabist charities, and there’s no question they’ll pour money into the Awakening, and they’re so hostile to Shi’ism and to Iran that how can you possibly predict anything other than violence? How do we get out of this? There is no way out. We have a moral obligation to the people of Iraq that goes beyond anything that anyone’s talking about. The notion that it’s their problem, that we should just leave… I mean, can you believe what we’ve done to their society? Imagine the psychosis, the insanity, that we’ve induced.’ He stabs the yolk of one of his poached eggs, and sets about his toast like he hasn’t eaten in days.

Seymour M Hersh (the M is for Myron) was born in Chicago, the son of Yiddish-speaking immigrants from Lithuania and Poland (he has a twin brother, a physicist, and two sisters, also twins). The family was not rich; his father, who died when Seymour was 17, ran a dry-cleaning business. After school he attended a local junior college until a professor took him aside, asked him what he was doing there and walked him up to the University of Chicago. ‘Chicago was this great egghead place,’ Hersh says. ‘But I knew nothing. I came out of a lower-middle-class background. At that time, everyone used to define themselves: Stalinist, Maoist, whatever. I thought they meant “miaowist”. Seriously! Something to do with cats. Among my peers, they all thought I would write the great novel, because I was very quick and cutting. I’ve just read Philip Roth’s new novel [Indignation], and the arrogance of his character reminded me of that certitude. I was always pointing out other people’s flaws.’ He went to law school but hated it, dropped out and wound up as a copy boy, then a reporter for the local City News Bureau. Later he joined Associated Press in Washington and rose through its ranks until he quit for a stint working for the Democrat senator Eugene McCarthy. Pretty soon, though, he was back in journalism. ‘Using words to make other people less big made me feel bigger, though the psychological dimension to that… well, I don’t want to explore it.’ His wife of 40 years, Elizabeth, whom he describes as ‘the love of my life’ in the acknowledgements of Chain of Command (they have three grown-up children), is a psychoanalyst. Doesn’t she ever tell him about his ego and his id? He looks embarrassed. ‘No, no… marriage is… different. When you live with someone you don’t… The hardest part for her is when she tells me to take out the garbage and I say: “Excuse me? I don’t have time. I’m saving the world.”‘ Later, however, he tells me that journalism, like psychoanalysis, is about ‘bringing things into focus’.

He was a broke freelance working for a new syndication agency when he got wind of My Lai. A military lawyer told him that a soldier at Fort Benning, a Georgia army base, was facing a court martial for murdering at least 109 Vietnamese civilians. Hersh rocked up in Benning and went on a door-to-door search, somehow avoiding the officers on base, until he found Lieutenant William L Calley Jr, a boyish 26-year-old otherwise known as Rusty. He asked the former railway pointsman if they could talk, which they did, for three hours. They then went to the grocery store, got steaks, bourbon and wine, and talked some more at the apartment of Calley’s girlfriend. Calley told Hersh that he had only been following orders, but nevertheless he described what had happened (it later turned out that soldiers of the 11th Brigade killed 500 or more civilians that morning). Soon after, 36 newspapers ran the story under Hersh’s byline. Some, however, did not carry it, in spite of the fact that Calley’s own lawyer had confirmed it, among them the New York Times. The scoop caused not only horror but disbelief. Hersh, though, was not to be put off. ‘By the third story, I found this amazing fellow, Paul Meadlo, from a small town in Indiana, a farm kid, who had actually shot many of the Vietnamese kids – he’d shot maybe 100 people. He just kept on shooting and shooting, and then the next day he had his leg blown off, and he told Calley, as they medevac-ed him: “God has punished me and now he will punish you.”‘ Hersh wrote this up, CBS put Meadlo on the TV news, and finally the story could no longer be ignored. The next year, 1970, he was awarded the Pulitzer prize.

How does Hersh operate? The same way as he’s always done: it’s all down to contacts. Unlike Bob Woodward, however, whose recent books about Iraq have involved long and somewhat pally chats with the President, Hersh gets his stuff from lower down the food chain. Woodward was one of those who was convinced that WMD would be found in Iraq. ‘He does report top dollar,’ says Hersh. ‘I don’t go to the top because I think it’s sorta useless. I see people at six o’clock in the morning somewhere, unofficially.’ Are they mostly people he has known for a long time? ‘No, I do pick up new people.’ But with new contacts he must be wary; there is always the danger of a plant. His critics point to what they regard as his excessive use of unnamed sources. Others accuse him of getting things wrong and of being gullible. A low point came in the Nineties, when he embarked on a book about Kennedy, The Dark Side of Camelot. Hersh was shown documents that alleged the President was being blackmailed by Marilyn Monroe, and though he discovered that they were fake in time to remove all mention of them from his book, the damage to his reputation had already been done – and the critics let rip anyway, for his excitable portrayal of JFK as a sex addict and bigamist. There was also the time, in 1974, when he accused the US ambassador to Chile, Edward Korry, of being in on a CIA plot to overthrow President Allende. Some years later, Hersh had to write a long correction; it ran on page one of the New York Times. As a Jew, his mailbag since 9/11 has also included letters from readers who denounce him as a self-hater (later, at this office, he shows me one of these: its author, an MD with a Florida postcode, accuses him of being a ‘kapo’ – the kapo were concentration camp prisoners who worked for the Nazis in exchange for meagre privileges).

His supporters, though, believe that his mistakes – and even the wilder allegations he sometimes makes in speeches – should always be put in the context of his hit rate. A former Washington Post reporter, Scott Armstrong, once put it this way. Say he writes a story about how an elephant knocked someone down in a dark room. ‘If it was a camel, or three cows, what difference does it make? It was dark, and it wasn’t supposed to be there.’ Hersh himself points out that, since 1993, he has been up against the stringent standards of the New Yorker and its legendary team of fact checkers. ‘By the way, all my inside sources have to deal with the fact checkers, and they do. People find it hard to believe that, I don’t know why.’ And then there is his editor, David Remnick. ‘I never love editors,’ he says. ‘But David is smart and he has great judgement.’ How often does he check in with Remnick? ‘I’m sure he would tell you less often than I should. He gets pretty angry with me. Sometimes we have these rows where I won’t take his calls. He says no to a lot of stuff – stuff I think the editor would die for! Admittedly, it is not the Seymour Hersh weekly. But sometimes he’ll say: “We are not going to publish this kind of stuff ‘cos it’s frigging crazy.”‘ It was Tina Brown, formerly of Tatler and Vanity Fair, who brought him to the New Yorker. ‘What’s-her-name… yeah, Tina. She gave me a lot of money, and she said: “Just go do it!” But she used to worry. She’d call me up and say, “I sat next to Colin Powell at dinner last night and he was railing about how awful you are.” So I would say, “Well, that’s good.” And she’d say, “Is it?” And I’d tell her, “Yes, it is.”‘

Does it worry him that he is sometimes described as the ‘last American reporter’? Who is coming up behind him? ‘A friend of mine wants to put $5m into a chair for investigative journalism for me, but why would I want to do that? Look, the cost of running my kind of work is very high, and a lot of stories don’t even work out. I know a wonderful journalist who works on the internet. I called friends of mine at the Times and the Post. But he hasn’t been hired because he would cost a lot of money.’ But Hersh is in his seventies (he is a year younger than John McCain, though you’d never know), he can’t keep going forever. Or can he? Most reporters start out hungry but somewhere along the way are sated. Not Hersh. ‘I have information; I have people who trust me. What else am I going to do? I love golf and tennis and if I was good enough, I’d be professional. Since I’m not, what am I gonna do? Why shouldn’t I be energetic? Our whole country is at stake. We have never had a situation like this. These men have completely ruined America. It’s so depressing, my business!’ Yet he seems chipper. ‘No, I’m not chipper. I don’t know how to put where I am… I don’t take it that seriously. I’ve been there: up, down, back up. I do a lotta speeches, I make a lotta money, I proselytise.’ Does he like making money? ‘Are you kidding? I do!’

After we finish breakfast, he takes me to the office. He is eager to put off the moment when he must get on with his Syria piece. The more time he wastes with me… well, the morning will soon be over. Inside he points out a few choice interior-design details – the Pulitzer (it nestles among dozens of other awards), the framed memo from Lawrence Eagleburger and Robert McCloskey to Henry Kissinger, their boss at the State Department, which is dated 24 September 1974, and reads: ‘We believe Seymour Hersh intends to publish further allegations on the CIA in Chile. He will not put an end to this campaign. You are his ultimate target.’ Then he roots around in a cairn of paper for a while – quite a long while – eventually producing a proof of one of his articles with Remnick’s editing marks on it. I’ve never seen anything so harsh in my life. Practically every other sentence has been ruthlessly disembowelled. ‘Yeah, pretty tough, huh?’ He also shows me one of his own memos to a contact. It makes reference to the current administration. ‘These guys are hard-wired and drinking the Kool-Aid,’ it says, deadpan. He laughs. He’s getting cheerier by the minute. Soon it will be time for lunch! Now he puts his feet on the desk, removes one training shoe and jauntily waves the sweaty sole of a white sock at me. A couple of calls come in. He is concise bordering on cryptic. Finally an old Times colleague arrives. ‘I knew this guy when he had hair!’ Hersh shouts as this fellow and I pass in a small area of floorspace not yet covered by books or papers. I’m leaving, but Hersh doesn’t get up and he doesn’t say goodbye. A breezy salute – and then his eyes fall ravenously on his pal.

Palestinian "Left"- Selling their souls for 30 coins, miserably failed their people.

Contributed By Lucia

Abbas courts PFLP; gives Malloh sensitive positions in PA departments
[ 29/09/2008 – 10:43 AM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)– well-informed Palestinian sources have disclosed that the PA chief Mahmoud Abbas has offered the PFLP a number of important political and security positions in the PA departments in understating with Abdulrahim Malloh, the deputy-chief of the PFLP.
The sources also revealed to the independent Palestine News Network website that Malloh, who has good rapport with Abbas, had accepted the PA offer to give the PFLP cadres sensitive and important positions in the PA although it contradicts the Front’s public rejction of the Olso Agreement.

According to the sources, Malloh started to contact a number of the PFLP cadres in Palestine to offer them the new jobs, and that Dr. Jebrael Al-Shomaly, one of the PFLP figures, has accepted to be appointed as an attaché to the PA embassy in Ghana.

The sources considered such dramatic transformation in the PFLP stand on participating in the Oslo-produced PA agencies as clear evidence on the Front’s failure to remain firm on its stands, and that it reflects the PFLP’s inability to answer the living needs of hundreds of its members who, according to the sources, bolted the Front and joined the PA security apparatuses.
“This is a clear indication that the PFLP had silently joined the PA departments despite its declared rejection of the Oslo accord”, the website quoted a number of the PFLP cadres as affirming.

According to the PFLP cadres, no less than the son of Malloh, Sharief Malloh, has joined the PA security departments and worked as a legal advisor in one of the PA security arms, which the cadres confirmed, “violates the Front’s principle of not participating in any of the PA security departments [under the Oslo umbrella”.

To some of the PFLP cadres, the new orientation of Malloh and comrades was evident “deviation from the Front’s main objectives”, which per se reflects deep difference in the opinions of the PFLP top leaders, the sources underscored.

The sources also disclosed that secretary-general of the PFLP Ahmad Sa’adat was against the stands of Malloh and rejects what he described as “the PA unfaithful courting of the Front”.

In the past, a number of senior officials in the PFLP had accused Malloh of leading a trend within the Front that completely adopts and approves the vision and the stands of Fatah faction and Abbas at the expense of the PFLP principles and stands.

My Comment:
No surprise, Read the article below and connect the dots.
PFLP, like Hamas challange Mallohs,
Will abbas succeed in dividing PFLP while trhe hard liner Ahmad Saadat in Prison?.
Will history is repeating itself?
While Habash in jail in Syria, Hawatmi, Backed by Arafat lead the seperation of DPFLP.
Later Arafat, bought Yasir Abd Rabbu in DPFLP, and Bassam Abu Sharif in PFLP.

I still remember, my last meeting in 1991 with Late Abu Adnan, Abdulkarim Hamad, a member of the Political Bureau of DPFLP, He said our comrades call ABD RABBU : Yasir Abd Yasir (Yasir the Slave of Yasir)

Malloh is selling the right of return and the dream of HABASH the Profit of Arab nationalisn and armed struggle.

However, Habash, himself said it to the Leftist Angry Arab: WE FAILED LET THEM (ISLAMISTS) TRY.

Meanwhile, PP Anal-ysist is still discussing the death of Panarabism and Islam: Long live his Left
===================

If Abbas will not demand the right of return, he must step down
Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine

Comrade Abu Sami: If Abbas will not demand the right of return, he must step down
PFLP

Hamas Challenges Abbas Term Extension

Mhanna: “Egypt is serious in ending divisions; Arabs intervention will add success factors” [Comment: Egypt is serious in saving the ass of Abbas]

author Monday September 15, 2008 11:40author by Saed Bannoura – Translation, IMEMC

Rabah Mhanna
Rabah Mhanna

This is an interview with Rabah Mhanna, member of the political bureau of the leftist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) conducted by Ashraf Abu Al Hol and published on Monday by the Al Ahram daily in Cairo.

In the interview, Mhanna says that Cairo is serious in its efforts to end the internal Palestinian tension and that Egyptian officials set a period between 45 days and two months to formulate a vision for a comprehensive Palestinian dialogue which would continue for a number of days. He also said that Egypt is supported by several Arab countries in order to ensure the success of these talks.

More

Realated Links:
Hamas Backs Reconciliation, Rejects PressureHamas:
Hamas: Cairo cooking a reginal deal to release Shalit end the Siege and Bring Abbas back to Gaza
Fithy Fath blaming Hamas for things that took place in Iraq
Hamas- Pharoah Tunnel WAR
Abu al Fath: We have a common enemy – Hamas
Hamas to Raise Demands if Israel Tries to Change Terms
The Joke of Palestinian “democracy” under Fatah,
Israel Palestinian Unity: Goal or Mantra?

3 comments:

did you hear Olmert talk about freeing Most the westbank , east Jerusalem and the Golan heights ? why do they do that when they leave office ? LIke Jimmy carter when he rememebered the Palestinians when he left office . ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7642090.stm

uprooted Palestinian said…

Fatima
I posted the Article, your comment and my reply.

The Palestinian Left and RoR
October 06, 2008 By Haidar Eid

Haidar Eid’s ZSpace Page

Join ZSpace

FROM PP: ON HAMAS POLITICAL "PROSTITUTION"

Hamas Considers The Pharaoh and His Policies as “Positive!”


“GAZA, (PIC)– The Hamas Movement has stressed Saturday that its rapport with Egypt was positive and stable, adding that certain media outlets quoted statements of Hamas spokesman in central Gaza Strip Yousef Farahat out of context and on selective basis.

In a written press statement he issued and a copy of which was obtained by the PIC, Dr. Sami Abu Zuhri, the spokesman of Hamas Movement in Gaza Strip, underlined the good relationship between Hamas and Egypt, saying that statements of Farahat expressed the dissatisfaction of Hamas’s cadres of the continued detention of Hamas’s military leader Ayman Nofal in Egyptian jails.

“Hamas treats all concerned issues with the Egyptian officials through direct contacts, and in away that preserves the good relationship between the two parties although we stress the need to immediately and swiftly release Nofal…..”

COMMENT: Who is Hamas kidding, besides itself? Enough with this political prostitution! Why not call things by their real name?

Why not have the courage to acknowledge that the Pharaoh has been an active Zionist in the siege and starvation of 1.5 million Palestinians? Why not state the fact that the Pharaoh’s troops have been working directly with the US army to locate and blow up or fill with poison gas (while Palestinians are still in the tunnels) the tunnels in Rafah that are the only remaining link to bring in desperately needed food and medicine? Why is Hamas not mentioning that more than 50 Palestinians have been killed by the Pharaoh’s army since the beginning of this year?

In short why is Hamas whitewashing the Pharaoh? This does not help Hamas, to the contrary it destroys its credibility and makes the Pharaoh look better than the USraeli tool that he is.

This is Zionism: "agricultural holocaust" against olive trees

UPDATED
[ 07/10/2008 – 09:25 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)– Palestinian agriculture minister Dr. Mohammed Ramadan Al-Agha has accused Tuesday the Israeli occupation authorities of carrying out an agricultural holocaust in Palestine with the aim to destroy the olive season for this year.

He cited the persistent aggressions of the Israeli occupation soldiers and settlers against the Palestinian farmers, especially in the West Bank, including the Jordan Valley and the occupied city of Jerusalem among other cities.

In a press conference he held in Gaza on the matter, Agha accused the Israeli occupation soldiers of assisting the settlers in blocking Palestinian farmers and denying them access to cultivate their farms.

He said that such Israeli practices would inflict big losses on olive producers this year that will also add to the losses inflicted on the farmers as a result of burning the olive trees and confiscating their lands at the hands of the IOF troops and the armed Israeli settlers.
But in spite of those Israeli measures against them, Agha asserted, the Palestinian farmers remained adherent to and steadfast on their lands, highlighting that the olive tree is considered “the land, the honor, the roots, and the history” for the Palestinian people.

He also stressed that his ministry would preserve the stability of the olive oil prices in the local market as it had done over the past two years by banning the importat of foreign olive oil.
The ministry also called on the Palestinian farmers to be vigilant, and not to be deceived by the Israeli traders who, according to Agha exploit the poor economic condition of the farmers and buy the olive oil at low prices before selling it in the foreign market at high price.
The Palestinian olive oil is known for its excellent quality, and classified to be one of the best in the world.

In this regard, Agha hailed foreign sympathizers for their support to the Palestinian farmers and for helping them in harvesting their olive groves, urging foreign and Arab charities to give the Palestinian olive oil priority in buying and marketing it in the local and foreign markets.

******************************************************************


IOF troops kidnap eight Palestinians, prevent farmers from harvesting olives

[ 08/10/2008 – 08:35 PM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)– The IOF troops kidnapped eight Palestinians from villages near the northern West Bank town of Tulkarem and stopped farmers from reaching their land to harvest their olive crop.

Local sources in the village of Qaffin, to the north of Tulkarem, said that IOF troops kidnapped Qusai Ayed Hirsha (14 years) and Nabil Khasib (15) from their fields in Qaffin while they were helping their families harvest the olive crop.

In the village of Anabta, to the east of Tulkarem, the IOF troops kidnapped three youths from their homes on Wednesday at dawn; Muhammad Isam Nassar (17), Islam Abdel-Karim Ali (17) and Zaid Burhan Hamdallah (17).

The IOF troops also raided the homes of Zeyad Saadah and Izz Toum, but could not find them.

The IOF troops had earlier kidnapped Ersleen Sawalha from Dhennaba east of Tulakarem and who works as an accountant with a charity there. Ersleen is the sister of martyr Eyad Sawalha, one of the commanders of the Islamic Jihad in Jenin.

Two other young men were also kidnapped by the IOF troops on Tuesday from the village of Shufa south of Tulkarem; Musaab Ibrahim (23) and Ala’ Fathi Musa (26) after ransacking their homes.

Furthermore, the IOF troops stationed at the gates opposite Deir al-Ghsoun and Qaffin villages to the north of Tulkarem and the village of Kafr Sour to the south of Tulakarem barred Palestinian farmers from reaching their olive groves which lie beyond the apartheid wall under the pretext of the Jewish celebrations of Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement).

Palestinians who own land that lie behind the apartheid wall are barred from tending their fields and are only allowed to harvest their olive crop by applying for special permits (similar to pass laws during the era of the defunct apartheid regime in South Africa). These permits are usually given to older people denying Palestinian families the help of their younger members during this important season.

Those people are also denied reaching their fields to plough them and clear them of weeds ahead of the olive season, which makes these fields prone to catching fire and affects the yield.

Settlers burn 3,000 olive trees in southern Nablus Contributed by Anonymous (Thank you, Kindly use a name)

ImageNablus / PNN – Fires set by Israeli settlers in southern Nablus olive groves are up this year, reports journalist Ali Daraghmeh. “This year settlers south of the city of Nablus burned about 3,000 olive trees. The settlers are also burning cars and beating farmers. This week four people were hospitalized.”

Ghassan, a local official in municipal affairs, described “masked gunmen attacking farmers in 33 basin areas in Salfit and 39 in Nablus.”

Israeli settlements in the West Bank are most often built on hills and then spread down. Palestinian agricultural lands are afflicted from the initial land confiscation to the eventual threat in the basin areas. Fields just beyond those overtaken are particularly dangerous.
Officials note that the coordination between the Israeli army and Palestinian residents does not provide security to the farmer. Ghassan said today, “The initial dates for protection were not abided under the pretext of the Jewish holidays and closures. We are in contact with each village under attack by settlements and monitor all ongoing damage. The reports go to the President and Prime Minister.”

The olive harvest season is meant to be a major source of income but yearly the obstacles increase. After the olives are picked they must be made into oil and taken to market, neither of which is undertaken without additional risk.

Israeli war against Palestinian names


Researcher urges youth awareness in Israeli war against Palestinian names

Contributed by Anonymous (Thank you, Kindly use a name)

ImageJerusalem / Maisa Abu Ghazaleh – In an East Jerusalem neighborhood children were telling each other how they spent last Friday. One of them, 13 year old Ahmed, said that he went on a picnic with his family to “Tielt.” He also said that he witnessed an auto accident at a “Ramzor.” The boy caught my attention by the way he pronounced his words.

“Tielt” is the Israeli take on “Be’er Al-Safafi,” and “Ramzor” is the Hebrew word traffic light.

When I asked him whether he knew what “Tielt” meant he said that he did not. I was not surprised by his ignorance, but what really astonished me is Ahmed’s belief that this area had always been Israeli, and never Palestinian, and that “Tielt” was its original name.

As many residents will tell you, Israel fights the Arab existence in Jerusalem on a daily basis. One way in which they do this is by the war of idioms; this hidden war involves the blurring of Arabic influences of Jerusalemite neighborhoods and streets, by replacing them with Hebrew names and idioms, spreading them through the young generations.

In an interview, Hayel Sanduqa, the researcher of colonial affairs in Jerusalem, had this to say about changing the names of Arabic areas and streets: “This is an old yet new policy which the municipality of Jerusalem follows to Judaize the city and monopolize its estates either by changing the names of the streets by building synagogues in any area, or by excavating works.” He added: “Israel aims to have a religious and historical right in Jerusalem and justifies and legitimates these Judaizing operations, thus faking history in an obvious way.”

He went on to say, ” Israel always muddles up religion with politics, and gives the areas and politics a religious sense, for example naming them after prophet Jacob, and by using the star of David the prophet.”
Sanduqa stressed that the Israeli occupation is succeeding to spread its language and culture by imposing its idioms so that they will be dominant all over the country.

Sanduqa is astonished by the usage of these idioms by educated Jerusalemites, who are now using Hebrew words to express daily life: there are some words stemming from Hebrew and used in Arabic, and became commonly used among the educated like “Mahsom = Checkpoint,” “Ramzor = Traffic light,” and, “Mzgan = Air Conditioner.” These words are being passed on to a new generation, without explanation, to be thought of as Arabic with Arabic meanings.

Sanduqa added, “There lots of Arabic quarters, of which the names have been replaced on maps, signs, and addresses, like “Share’ Al-Wad” in the old city to “Hahay,” “Share’ Khan Al-Zeit” to “Habad,” “Bab Al-Saihra wa Al-Hai” to “Herodos,” “Karam Al-Ja’auni” to “The Grave of Friend Shamo’on,” “Jooret Al-Niqa’ ” in Shaikh Jarrah to “Akbanip of Haron’s Mother,” “Silwan” to “Kfar Hashloh,” “Der Ayyoub” to “Kfar Hemnim,” “Wadi Hilwe” to “Ma’ali Eer David,” “Wadi Al-Rababa” to “Gay Benhebo’om,” “Wad Sitna Mariam” to “Wadi Qadrun,” the Center quarter of Silwan to ” Eer David,” “E’en Silwan” to “Hazik Yaho,” “Hai Al-Farouq” in Jabal Al-Mokabber to “Nof Litzion,” “Jabal Al-Zeitoun” (Mount of Olives) to “Mesabri Tsurim,” and “Karm Ayyash” in Ras Al-A’moud to “Ma’ali Zatim.”

Sanduqa blames the Palestinian leadership which does not “support the city of Jerusalem, and there isn’t a consistent attitude towards Judaism and colonialism. The authorities must set a clear plan to eliminate the changing of Arabic names and increase the awareness of the youth through educational institutions and organizations and youth clubs, instead of dealing with it in a shallow and individual way. They should have a better and deeper insight to it.”

He added, “Jerusalem doesn’t need to be running after these positions, but it needs effective schemes to protect them.”
Sanduqa turns to the youth and the upcoming generation, and says, “I call on every Jerusalemite youth to preserve their own affiliation and their own belief, and we will use them to deal with this.”

He also urges them “not to surrender or lose hope, and they should resist, be proud, and unite against Judaization, reject the changing and replacing of Arabic names, and ignore the Hebrew names.”

Sanduqa said, “If we wanted to go further than that, we would have all streets of West Jerusalem, like “Al-Qatamoun,” “Al-Baqa’a,” “and “Talbyout,” in addition to other names of Palestinian towns and villages like “Deir Yassin” (Geba’at Sha’oul), “‘Asqalan” (Ashkalon), and many others preserved.”

%d bloggers like this: