’Israel’ Intervenes in Ghota Battles – What’s the reality of what is happening in the Gota?


UPDATE:

هجوم الغوطة فشل بشكل كامل والقتلى بالمئات بينهم عرب و مفاوضات للهرب

 

   هجوم الغوطة فشل بشكل كامل والقتلى بالمئات بينهم عرب و مفاوضات للهرب

اكد الاعلامي حسين مرتضى أن الهجوم على الغوطة الشرقية قد فشل نهائياً ولم تستطع المجموعات المسلحة أن تحقق أي شيء الآن المبادرة
أصبحت بيد الجيش السوري ويقوم الآن هو بملاحقة المجموعات المسلحة التي تنتشر في بعض البساتين وهذا الكلام حتى باعترافات المجموعات المسلحة أن الهدف من الهجوم قد فشل.
وأضاف  أن هناك أعدادا كبيرة من القتلى أغلبهم من السعودية قتلوا خلال هذه المعركة وهناك العديد من الجثث موجودة داخل البساتين في منطقة الغوطة الشرقية.
وأوضح مرتضى أن المثلث الأخطر والأهم ما يسمى مثلث العتيبة بالكامل، الذي أصبح تحت سيطرة الجيش السوري، والآن يستكمل عملياته باتجاه تنظيف المناطق الأخرى التي تتواجد فيها المجموعات المسلحة ويأتي ذلك بعد ساعات فقط من استعادة السيطرة على بلدة دير عطية الاستراتيجية، وأن الاشتباكات تدور على اطراف النبك حيث حسب المعلومات أن هناك أعداداً من المسلحين الذين حاولوا الفرار خلال الساعات الماضية وتم قتل بعض قادة هذه المجموعات المسلحة في منطقة النبك.
وأشار  أنه “بحسب بعض المعلومات أن بعض المجموعات المسلحة تحاول أن تتفاوض وتطلب أن لايكون هناك هجوم شرط أن تنسحب باتجاه مناطق يبرود ومناطق الزبداني ومنها إلى عرسال”.
وأضاف  أنه “خلال الساعات الماضية كنا أول من ذكرنا ان هناك أعداد من المسلحين الذين تم إدخالهم إلى منطقة عرسال اللبنانية ولم تتوقف هذه الحالة والليلة تم إدخال عدد من المسلحين المصابين الذين أصيبوا خلال المعركة في النبك وهم من جنسيات عربية ومن بينهم مقاتلون لبنانيون والآن تم إدخالهم إلى بلدة عرسال لتتم معالجتهم داخل الأراضي اللبنانية في بلدة عرسال وفي بعض الأحراش وخصوصاً بساتين الكرز والتفاح الموجودة في منطقة عرسال ومن يعرف طبيعة المنطقة يعرف الأماكن التي نتحدث عنها “.
والمح الاعلامي حسين مرتضى إلى أن “المعلومات تتحدث عن دور الكيان الاسرائيلي الذي كان عاملاً أساسياً في هذه معركة الغوطة الشرقية، من خلال عمليات التشويش ومن خلال عمليات الاستطلاع وتحديد أماكن انتشار الذي كان يقوم بها الجيش السوري بالإضافة الى تزويد المجموعات المسلحة بكل هذه المعلومات لذلك كان هذا الهجوم الأعنف والأشرس والأخطر لكن المهم في كل ذلك الآن”.
التيار

’Israel’ Intervenes in Ghota Battles

Local Editor

Zionist armyBattles launched more than a week ago of Damascus by a surprised assault against the Syrian army forward posts in the eastern Ghota may turn to be the first occasion involving the Israeli army effectively in the war in Syria along one of the parties, Lebanese daily Assafir reported Saturday.

Sources told the newspaper that Zionist troops have provided reconnaissance maps and photos of the Syrian army positions to the attacking force, which moved from Jordan under the leadership of Saudi-U.S.-Zionist coordinated intelligence.

“However, the great Israeli contribution in the East Ghota battle was the pillar of the whole attack. According to security information, before the start of the first round of the attack, the Israelis succeeded to disrupt communications system for each of the Fourth Division, the Republican Guard, units of Hezbollah elite forces, the Iraqi Abu al Fadl al Abbas factions deployed in the region.

During the first hours of the attack, the Israelis used electronic means of encryption, and managed to disrupt radio communications between Syrian groups and their allies on the first line of defense, which was breached quickly, and led to the fall of the seven villages and farms in the area of al-Marj.

It has become known that units of the fourth division stationed in the region had lost contact with commanders, and other units protected retreating groups’ lines towards the second line of defense to prevent the attackers from progress toward their strategic goal of Otaiba, which forms the entrance to East Gouta and the key to the siege imposed over it.

Source: Newspapers
30-11-2013 – 13:52 Last updated 30-11-2013 – 13:52

Justice for Jewish Refugees!

Justice for Palestinian  Jewish Refugees!
Who better to put lipstick on the proverbial pig than the cosmetic empire mogul and President of the World Jewish Congress, Ronald S. Lauder?

In a recent opinion piece published in the Jewish Week (thanks to Rehmat for this find), Lauder claims that the world “has long recognized the Palestinian refugee problem without recognizing the other side of the story — the 850,000 Jewish refugees of Arab countries.”
He omits the role of the Zionist terrorist false flag operations in “convincing” the Arab Jews to emigrate to Israel. In essence he omits the most glaring aspect of the real commonality of the two refugee groups: the plight of both was caused directly by the zionist state.
As Rehmat noted, “Israeli historian professor Yigal Bin-Nun (Bar-Ilan University), in a study exposed Zionist lies about Jewish exodus from Morocco. Based on his study of Moroccan Jewish community, Bin-Nun has claimed that Mossad, the national intelligence agency of Israel, was behind the whole operation wherein about 160,000 Moroccan Jews left Morocco for the Zionist occupied Palestine.”
Needless to say Lauder also omits to mention that to this day the very Arab Jews for whom he demands “redress” are treated as second-class citizenin Israel. Rehmat reminds us that “similar terrorist activities were carried out in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, Tunisia and other places to force the local Jews to leave their ancestral homelands and settle on lands and properties stolen from Native Muslim and Christian Palestinians.”
Lauder further states that “for any Middle East peace process to be credible and enduring, it must ensure that all bona fide refugees receive equal rights and treatment ..”
Should we gather from this that he proposes, in the interest of equal treatment, that all those Jewish refugees be placed in refugee camps?
“World Jewry,” he informs us as the President of its Congress,  “hopes and expects this principle will inform American diplomacy as it facilitates the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and works for peace and justice at the United Nations. To highlight the issue, the World Jewish Congress recently hosted an event at the United Nations with the Israeli Mission, the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and Justice for Jews from Arab Countries.” 
He goes on to explain why the plight of the Jewish refugees is considerably greater than that of the Palestinian refugees:
They were even more numerous than the Arab refugees from Palestine; their losses of property and institutions were in fact far greater.”
When it comes to finding a legal loophole, Lauder knows who is the go-to-man:
“As Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz explained to our conference at the United Nations last year, the rights of Jewish refugees of Arab countries are in fact enshrined in Security Council Resolution 242, which refers to the rights of “refugees” in the Arab-Israel conflict without specifying their nationality.” 
Lauder is pleased to note that the US is on board with this and has been since 2008:
“In April 2008, the U.S. Congress unanimously adopted a historic resolution that granted first-time recognition to Jewish refugees from Arab countries. It declared that no comprehensive Middle East peace can be reached without recognition of, and redress for, the legitimate rights of Jewish refugees from Arab countries. Further, Congress said that all bilateral and multilateral discussions and documents should refer to the multiple Middle East refugee populations that arose from the Arab-Israeli conflict.”
As for the “redress” expected, Lauder insists it is not about money (it never is, ask Germany and Switzerland):
“At its core, the issue is not about money. It is about recognition — that Jews were victimized and displaced from their countries of birth; legality — that under international law, Jews were legally determined to be refugees; and equality — that all refugees must receive equal rights and redress.”
Actually this is the only part that contains a kernel of truth: money is not the main objective. The real purpose is to DENY the Palestinian refugee tragedy by making it secondary to the “far greater” Jewish losses and to tie the ‘peace process’–nonviable in itself–to yet another condition.
Jewish shamelessness and gall never fails to top itself to ever more nauseating depths of amorality.

Britons protest over Israel plan to remove 70,000 Palestinian Bedouins

More than 50 public figures including Antony Gormley and Brian Eno put names to letter opposing expulsion from historic land

Bedouin children walk to school in the Negev desert

Bedouin children walk to school in the Negev desert. Photograph: Karen Robinson

More than 50 public figures in Britain, including high-profile artists, musicians and writers, have put their names to a letter opposing an Israeli plan to forcibly remove up to 70,000 Palestinian Bedouins from their historic desert land – an act condemned by critics as ethnic cleansing.

The letter, published in the Guardian, is part of a day of protest on Saturday in Israel, Palestine and two dozen other countries over an Israeli parliamentary bill that is expected to get final approval by the end of this year.

The eviction and destruction of about 35 “unrecognised” villages in the Negev desert will, the letter says, “mean the forced displacement of Palestinians from their homes and land, and systematic discrimination and separation”.

The signatories – who include the artist Antony Gormley, the actor Julie Christie, the film director Mike Leigh and the musician Brian Eno – are demanding that the British government holds Israel to account over its human rights record and obligations under international law.

According to Israel, the aims of the Prawer Plan – named after the head of a government commission, Ehud Prawer – are economic development of the Negev desert and the regulation of Palestinian Bedouins living in villages not recognised by the state.

The population of these villages will be removed to designated towns, while plans for new Jewish settlements in the area are enacted.

But Adalah, a human rights and legal centre for Arabs in Israel, says: “The real purpose of the legislation [is] the complete and final severance of the Bedouin’s historical ties to their land.”

The “unrecognised” villages in the Negev, whose populations range from a few hundred to 2,000, lack basic services such as running water, electricity, landline telephones, roads, high schools and health clinics. Some consist of a few shacks and animal pens made from corrugated iron; others include concrete houses and mosques built without necessary but unobtainable permission.

The Bedouin comprise about 30% of the Negev’s population but their villages take up only 2.5% of the land. Before the state of Israel was created in 1948 they roamed widely across the desert; now, two-thirds of the region has been designated as military training grounds and firing ranges.

Under the Prawer Plan, between 40,000 and 70,000 of the remaining Bedouin – who became Israeli citizens in the 1950s – will be moved into seven over-crowded, impoverished, crime-ridden state-planned towns. The Israeli government says it is an opportunity for Bedouins to live in modern homes, take regular jobs and send their children to mainstream schools. They will be offered compensation to move, it adds.

Miranda Pennell, a film-maker and one of the letter’s signatories, said: “Citizenship counts for nothing in Israel if you happen to be an Arab. Tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouin are being forcibly displaced from their homes and lands. At the same time, there are Israeli government advertisements on the web that promise you funding as a British immigrant to come and live in ‘vibrant communities’ in the Negev – if you are Jewish. This is ethnic cleansing.”

The actor David Calder said: “The Israeli state not only practices apartheid against the Palestinians in the occupied Palestinian territories, but it seems they have no hesitation in practicing apartheid on their own citizens – in this instance, the Bedouins. When is the west going to find these actions intolerable?”

Partition of Palestine: Loss of Palestine

 Al-manar
Eslam al-Rihani

USA: Norman Finkelstein On November 29, 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted Resolution 181 recommending the implementation of the Partition Plan of Palestine. The Plan was described as a Plan of Partition with Economic Union which, after the termination of the then British Mandate over the Arab country, would lead to the creation of two independent Arab and Jewish States along with a  Special International Order for the City of al-Quds.The Plan sought to address the conflicting objectives of what it considered ‘two competing movements’, i.e. the Arab nationalism and the Jewish nationalism, widely known as Zionism.

Part I of the Plan contained provisions dealing with the Termination of the Mandate, Partition and Independence, where Part II included a detailed description of the proposed boundaries for each state. The Plan also called for Economic Union between the proposed states, and for the protection of religious and minority rights.Palestine: UN Partition PlanImmediately after adoption of the Resolution – accepted by the Jewish Agency on behalf of the Jewish community, but rejected by Arab governments at the time – the civil war broke out in Mandatory Palestine, and the partition plan was not implemented.Following more than forty years of continuous conflict, the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of 15 November 1988 was interpreted as a support for a two-state solution, for referencing the UN Partition Plan of 1947 and “UN resolutions since 1947” in general.Many Palestinians and Israelis, as well as the Arab League, have stated that they would accept a two-state solution based on 1949 Armistice Agreements, more commonly referred to as the “1967 borders”. And in a 2002 poll conducted by the American Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), 72% of both Palestinians and Israelis supported at that time a peace settlement based on the 1967 borders so long as each group could be reassured that the other side would be cooperative in making the necessary concessions for such a settlement.Different conferences were held to negotiate the two-state solution, the most significant was the Oslo Accords, which officially divided Palestinian land into three administrative divisions and created the framework for how much of the Zionist entity’s political borders with the Palestinian territories function today, not to mention the Camp David 2000 Summit and follow-up negotiations at Taba in January 2001. However, no final agreement was ever reached amid nonstop Zionist massacres against the armless Palestinian people. Commemorating the 66th anniversary of the Resolution 181, Al-Manar Website interviewed the American-Jewish author and political strategist, Doctor Norman Finkelstein, to highlight the most significant developments regarding the two-state solution and the future of the Palestinian cause:

Al-Manar Website: Do you think “Israel” will be able to make the whole world recognize it as a Jewish state?

Dr. Finkelstein: Israel’s principal goal right now is to consolidate politically its achievements since the Oslo agreement was signed in 1993.  Practically, this means it wants to annex the major settlement blocs that constitute approximately 10 percent of the West Bank, along the path of the Wall it has been building.  It also wants to liquidate the refugee question.

The Palestinians have never been weaker politically.  Regionally, they have no allies, and internally they have neither leadership nor popular resistance.  It’s quite possible that Israel will succeed in imposing a historic defeat on the Palestinians through U.S. Secretary of State Kerry’s current negotiations. Al-Manar Website: Is the two state solution a functionable or workable now? Dr. Finkelstein: The international community has called for a resolution of the Israel-Palestine conflict on the basis of two states along the 1967 border and a “just” solution of the Palestinian refugee question.   Judging by the annual votes in the United Nations General Assembly, the entire world supports this formula, except the U.S., Israel and a handful of South Pacific islands.   This is not a philosophical or even a moral question.   It is a strictly political question, although it is also backed with the force of international law.  I see no political basis for any other solution to the conflict, because no other solution has significant political support in the world.

Al-Manar Website: How do u assess the safety of Israel after all that happened and is happening in the region?

Dr. Finkelstein: It cannot be doubted that Israel’s political existence for the foreseeable future is secure.  It is thriving economically and faces no significant military threats.  It is pointless to project into the future.  I lived long enough to see the fall of the Soviet Union, the end of Apartheid, and a Black man elected president in the United States.  The future is full of surprises, mostly unpredictable

Al-Manar Website: On a personal level, where the ongoing confrontation between you and the Zionist lobby has reached now?

Dr. Finkelstein: I have been unemployed the past seven years.  It has not been easy.  But I will reach my 60th birthday in a couple of weeks.  It means that I have lived much longer than the average person in Africa.  I also have a roof over my head, food on my table, and clothes on my back.  So I count my blessings.  I continue to read, think and occasionally write.   I also continue to do my small part to make the world a better place. He’s a strategist in American and Israeli affairs.

USA: Norman Finkelstein Norman G. Finkelstein received his doctorate in 1988 from the Department of Politics at Princeton University in the U.S.. For many years he taught political theory and the Zionist-Palestine conflict. He’s a strategist in American and Israeli affairs.He currently writes and lectures.
Source: Al-Manar Website
29-11-2013 – 09:15 Last updated 29-11-2013 – 16:26

Short Arab Spring Caused Long Palestinian Winter, Resistance Will Restore Rights

 Al-Manar

Mohamed Salami

The Western imperialism, led by the British Empire, plotted in the beginning of the twentieth century to plant a loyal servant in the stAqsarategic Arab region. This conspiracy intersected with the ambitions of the Zionist movement to establish an entity which enables it to carry out its colonial policies. The Zionist-Western strength defeated the Arab weakness; as a result, Palestine has been living a 100-year tragedy because of the emergence of the illegitimate entity, Israel, over its territories. Yet the recent change of the balance of power in the interest of the Arab forces of resistance has forced and will always force the Zionist servant  to surrender before the nation’s will.

Why Palestine?

In an interview with the British MP and political thinkerGeorge Galloway George Galloway, he said that Palestine was not the first choice of the Western-Zionist coalition to establish the unreal entity of Israel. He added that the Zionists were ready to accept anywhere to establish a state called Israel.
“The Zionist movement negotiated with the British empire over several countries, including Argentina, Seychelles, Uganda and others before settling in Palestine,” Galloway said.

Despite the fabrication of the religious attributes of choosing Palestine to settle in it, Galloway asserted that the members of the Zionist movement were atheists and had no religious attachment with Palestine.

The British political thinker also emphasized that the Western choice of Palestine to establish the Zionist state over its territories is not in the context of a cultural or religious struggle because “it was not a Christian choice.”

“The Christians believe in the prophets’ teachings and in the values of peace and charity, yet the colonial policies of the Western regime aimed at controlling the natural resources in this important part of the world.”

Judaization

Since the Zionists invaded Palestine, they have carried out Zionisma consistent policy to alter the character of all the Palestinian cities and villages, especially Jerusalem.

Since 1948, the Zionist entity has sought to transform the physical and demographic landscape of Jerusalem to correspond with the Zionist vision. While much of this has been accomplished through the violent expulsion of Palestinians during the wars of 1948 and 1967, the Judaization of Jerusalem included the strategic extension of Jerusalem’s municipal boundaJudaizationries, bureaucratic and legal restrictions on Palestinian land use, disenfranchisement of Jerusalem residents, the expansion of settlements in ‘Greater Jerusalem’, and the construction of the separation wall.
The British writer, who has always been against the Western-Zionist projects, noted that the historical home of Jaffa was also confiscated from the Palestinians and turned it to be like a ‘Disneyland’ for the extended Tel Aviv.

Zionist Settlements

The British MP George Galloway considered that the Zionist settlements, which have extended over the different Palestinian cities, pose a great danger against the Palestinian rights aZionist Settlementss “this disastrous case is directly linked to the cause of the Palestinian refugees who deploy in the different neighboring countries.”

“The ongoing settlement projects complicate the possibility of reaching any solution for the Palestinian refugees because the Zionists built them, planning to use them forever.”

“Regarding the Israelis, the evacuation or the destruction of the Zionist settlements is impossible.”

Although the borders of the Zionist entity were restricted in 2000 after Hezbollah resistance liberated the Lebanese territories, limiting the ambitions of the Zionist entity to extend its borders; the Zionist settlements project will deprive the Palestinians from the their country’s natural resources, including the land. This has allowed the Zionists to control a larger area of Palestine.

Peace Talks Lack Peace

The British MP George Galloway stressed that the peace talks between the Palestinian and the Israeli negotiators will never reach any considerable result.

“The resignation of the Palestinian delegationTalks to the peace talks proves that this political track is futile as the Zionist entity is not ready to  pay the price of peace which is justice.”

The Palestinian negotiating team has resigned and decided not participate anymore in peace talks with the Israelis.
“Justice, which refers to granting the rights to their owners, is a prerequisite for the success of any peace talks,” Galloway highlighted.

“The two-state solution cannot survive because the Palestinian state will be on 23% of the total area of Palestine. This will keep the Palestinian refugees out of their native land.”

The British MP George Galloway said that Palestine must return to be the homeland of the followers of the divine religions, where all its citizens abide by law.

Arab Spring, Palestine Winter

As the path of Arab resistance has proved its efficiency in facing the Zionist project in the region, the Western imperialism decided to save its servant by stirring seditions in the Arab country in order to divert the Arab efforts and attention from their central cause of Palestine to internal struggles and conflicts.

This enabled the Israelis to escalate the aggressions against the Palestinians and to keep on the settlement construction projects.

The British writer, who has been supporting the Arab causes for decades, stated that most of the Arab governments have abandoned the Palestinian cause and moved to stir the sectarian seditions which serve the Zionist-Western projects.

“The claimed ‘Arab Spring’ in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Libya and Syria turned to be a long Palestinian winter.”

“The Arabs must move into actions that dPalestinian Resistanceirect the efforts towards facing the Zionist tyranny.”

Highlighting the Syrian crisis, the British MP George Galloway, who challenged a lot of Zionist-Western defamations, emphasized that the Western-Takfiri conspiracy against Syria has failed and that the axis of resistance is able to defeat the Zionist project in the Middle East.

The Iranian-Western nuclear agreement, the Syrian victory over the terrorist war against it and Hezbollah power grant the axis of resistance huge capabilities to resolve the war against the Zionist entity.

As the balance of power tends to be in the interest of the resistance, the Zionist entity will be forced to surrender before it restores the rights to their owners.

Source: Al-Manar Website
28-11-2013 – 22:49 Last updated 29-11-2013 – 15:23

Related Articles

The unholy alliance, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Al-Qaeda

http://www.shoah.org.uk/2013/11/29/al-qaeda-operates-on-behalf-of-irahell-west-press-tv/

-Press TV (watch interview)
The al-Qaeda mercenaries in Syria operate on behalf of the Israeli regime and the West, aiming to break up the Middle East and spread sectarianism, an analyst tells Press TV.

Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri recently called for support for the foreign-backed insurgents in Syria in their fight against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Meanwhile, despite a temporary truce that took effect in Syria on Friday, the insurgents launched attacks in several areas, killing dozens of people and injuring tens of others. Syria has been experiencing unrest since March 2011. Many people, including large numbers of security forces, have been killed in the turmoil. Damascus blames the West and some of its regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, for arming and funding the insurgents. Press TV has conducted an interview with Kevin Barrett, an author and Islamic Studies expert, from Madison, to further discuss the issue. Barrett is joined by two additional guests: Sheikh Omar Bakri, a Salafist activist from Tripoli; and Omar Nashabi, with Al-Akhbar newspaper, from Beirut. The following is a rough transcription of the interview with Barrett. Press TV: Why do you think that the Syrian government even agreed, to begin with, to this ceasefire? Barrett: I think the Syrian government has a lot of tough choices in front of it. In the long run, the Syrian government knows that it’s going to have to reform; but right now, it’s fighting a destabilization campaign which is being led by the US-Zionist axis of evil, as we might term them, with support from Saudi Arabia and, unfortunately, Turkey, which looked like it was going to be an honest player in the Middle East just a year ago.colorado lottery Of course, a ceasefire is a good idea. It’s Eid al-Adha. Eid Mubarak to everyone. Muslims should not be killing fellow Muslims any time and especially not on Eid al-Adha. Naturally, the idea of a ceasefire is very appealing. As I understand it, the Syrian government entertained or accepted the idea of a ceasefire, and the first party that rejected it was one of these groups that called themselves an al-Qaeda affiliate. The idea of an al-Qaeda affiliate which claims to be fighting for Islam, to be destabilizing an Islamic country on behalf of the Zionists and the American empire is kind of laughable. I think one of the reasons that they won’t honor a ceasefire for Eid is that al-Qaeda is essentially an infiltrated organization that operates on behalf of the empire rather than fighting against it.

If you look at who al-Qaeda has actually killed over the years, they’ve killed almost entirely their fellow Muslims. In these embassy bombings in Africa that they claimed credit for, they killed almost entirely Muslim Africans. In the fighting that they’ve done against the Russian empire, they ended up killing a lot of fellow Muslims there.

They’ve killed very, very few Americans and Israelis. Al-Qaeda, of course, did not have anything to do with the 9/11 attacks. That was an inside job run by people in the US and Israeli intelligence apparatus. Al-Qaeda is really a manipulated group that serves to smear Islam. It’s created a negative brand name that only about seven percent of Muslims like, and the other 90 percent-plus don’t like. It’s destabilizing the Middle East on behalf of Zionism and the US empire. That’s what we’re seeing in Syria today. When it rejects a ceasefire for Eid al-Adha, that just shows us that this group is really not much more of a Muslim group anymore than the people who are pretending to be 9/11 hijackers in Florida were actual Muslims. These were people who were well known to be taking drugs, visiting prostitutes and so on… (In response to rhetoric by previous guest speaker, Sheikh Omar Bakri) He’s kind of insisting that al-Qaeda is a wonderful Sunni group fighting on behalf of Sunnis; is a perfect example of the sectarian nature of this group. These people are tasked by the Zionist and the empire with spreading sectarianism in the Muslim world, that is breaking up Muslim countries into different sects and different nationalities. Of course, al-Qaeda is mainly about sectarianism and it’s part of this crazy takfiri ideology of this tiny minority of extremist Muslims who say that anybody who doesn’t believe exactly what we believe is an evil apostate that could be killed – an evil unbeliever. This is nonsense… Press TV: Looking at the situation now, the Syrian government said that it was going to abide by the ceasefire. Of course, we know that there have been attacks and now the opposition is claiming that the Syrian government is actually the one that broke the truce. Your perspective, from a political perspective, do you think that it would be in the interests of the Syrian government, on the one hand, to say that they would stand by a ceasefire and then breaking it themselves? Let’s look at this, from your perspective. I would like to hear your take. Barrett: As I understand it, the Syrian government did some serious reflection before they accepted the ceasefire proposal. There was some dissidents within the ranks of the Syrian army. There were people who thought that a ceasefire would be in the interests of those fighting against the Syrian government. But in the end, as I understand it, the Syrian government did accept the ceasefire, and that it was first broken by these people claiming to be al-Qaeda. One never really knows precisely what’s happening on the ground in these kinds of situations. The first casualty of war is always the truth. The narrative, as I understand it, that makes the most sense is the way I described it. Again, I think that stabilization in Syria, calming things down, ending the killing, ending the suffering and bloodshed that the other guest referred to is in the interests of the Syrian government and in the interests of the people of the Middle East. It’s not in the interests of the people in the region to have the situation deteriorate and fall apart into bloodshed and chaos. I agree that the Syrian government does need to evolve and become more representative of its people. There’s no question about that. The way to make that happen is not through a divisive civil war pitting different Alawites against Sunnis, against Kurds and so on, breaking it up into little pieces. That’s exactly the… Israeli plan, to destroy the Middle East by breaking it into tiny little pieces along ethnic and sectarian lines. That’s exactly what these al-Qaeda people are working for. If one didn’t know better, one would think al-Qaeda was a brand invented by the Israelis themselves. In fact, it may have been because Bernard Lewis, the Zionist strategist and Orientalist, has been talking for years before there was al-Qaeda, for decades, actually, about needing to create a group modeled on the Ismaili assassins of the Middle Ages to destabilize the Middle East on behalf of Western intervention. I think that stability is obviously in the interests of the people in the Middle East and in the Syrian government. So, I think that they did accept the ceasefire. It’s the forces of destabilization that have rejected it and broken it. Press TV: What is the key to bringing peace to Syria, your perspective? Barrett: I don’t know if there’s a single key. I think we have to get back to the spirit of Islam. We’re in the Eid al-Adha holiday right now and we need to think about the spirit of unity. “Tawhid”, which is the absolute Unity of God, is reflected in the unity of creation and all of God’s creatures, all Muslims and all people. We shouldn’t be splitting off into different sects, hating people who don’t believe what we believe. We need to reach out to people from other sects. As Muslims, especially, we need to reach out to other kinds of Muslims who don’t think the way we do, and cross this kind of divide, and end this kind of crazy sectarian conflict that’s being sponsored by the enemies of the Middle East, the enemies of Islam, the people who want to break it up into pieces. We really need to start talking to each other instead of killing each other.

Death squads ..Jordanian terrorist interviewed without knowing that he was detained by the Syrian authorities

Video Confession of a Jordanian Jihadist

Following the request of many friends, who are unable to access to SANA to read the official news and do not have access to the satellite of the Syrian National TV, we propose here a summary of the main articles of the day and the Syrian video-news in Eng/Fra/Esp

A terrorist who was on a double suicide car bombing mission, passed out when the first car exploded to get captured by the SAA forces, treated for months by SAA without him finding out that he was arrested, during the interview the interviewer tells him that he is in one of the Syrian Government Centers.
~
Confession of a Jordanian Jihadist,
Surprised Because He Was Treated for Months in a SSA Hospital



~ WATCH AND READ WELL THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION/SUBTITLES AT THE END OF THE VIDEOCLIP, AS HE HAS A MESSAGE TO ALL THOSE WHO TOOK HIS PATH ~
Thanks to Eretz Zen Channel for the subtitles
http://www.youtube.com/user/EretzZen
Video News from #National_Syrian_Television

فرق الموت.. بالفيديو: لقاء مع إرهابي أردني لا يعلم أنه معتقل لدى السلطات السورية

أجرت قناة الفضائية السوري لقاءاً مع ارهابي أردني ينتمي لجبهة النصرة حاول تفجير نفسه بمقر للجيش السوري, الارهابي أصيب في محاولة التفجير و لم تنفجر سيارته المفخخة ثم وجد نفسه في مشفى يعالجه دون علمه أن هذا المشفى تابع للجيش السوري, تابع اللقاء لتتعرف على طريقة تفكير هؤلاء الارهابيين و كيفية تخطيط و تنفيذ جرائمهم:

According to Cameron & Hague Iran is Britain’s enemy…

We have a similar problem in the UK like the USA, our media , TV & newspapers, are dominated by tales of the persecuted Jews. Weekly reminders of the so called “holocaust” without a single mention of the Holodomor during which up to 12 million Ukrainians were starved to death by the Jewish run Soviet government. Even the Israeli media itself makes a mention occasionally ” some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish ” . No mention of the fact that the Bolshevik revolution in Russia in 1917 was accomplished by a government which had over 80% of their leaders being jewish. This very quickly led to the Soviet gulags being established and a resultant estimated 30 million deaths.

Even Winston Churchill wrote in 1920 ” There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews” .

But none of this ever gets a mention in the British media and that must be down to the fact that it is controlled by Zionism. Cameron himself has Jewish ancestry, just like the leader of the opposition, Miliband

http://www.redressonline.com/2013/11/so-iran-is-britains-enemy/

Cameron’s pledge to his Jewish friends: “An enemy of Israel is an enemy of mine. A threat to Israel is a threat to us all”

By Stuart Littlewood

Whenever a Western leader expresses adoration and undying support for the Zionist state the Jewish Chronicle (JC) can be relied on to make the most of it. This week it reports on UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s Chanucah/Hanukkah reception in Downing Street when he lit a menorah (that elegant nine-branch candlestick) with the chief rabbi.

According to the JC, Cameron took the opportunity to say he didn’t have much faith in the interim nuclear agreement struck with Iran. He told assembled Jewish leaders: “I know there will be great scepticism, I know there will be great worry. I share that scepticism, I share that worry. I don’t have any starry-eyed view of what this Iranian regime offers.”

He went on to announce: “I am with you and with the Israeli people, genuinely. As far as I’m concerned, an enemy of Israel is an enemy of mine. A threat to Israel is a threat to us all.

Cameron is a self-declared Zionist and, from his various remarks, thinks nothing of putting Israel’s interests, no matter how unlawful and menacing, ahead of the UK’s… Tory leader calls himself ‘Zionist’ http://www.haaretz.com/news/tory-leader-calls-himself-zionist-u-k-jews-campaign-against-boycott-1.223009

“I can promise you this: Britain will stand with Israel, Britain will support Israel, Britain will keep the pressure up on Iran. We do not want you to have a nuclear-armed near-neighbour, a nuclear threat facing your country… We share that feeling and show you our solidarity.”

Who on earth is he speaking for? Has he consulted the British people on this pledge of servitude to the criminal Zionist project? Was it in his election manifesto? This isn’t the first time Cameron has ‘mis-spoken’. He does it regularly.

And why has he got it in for Iran, which has no nuclear weapons and is no threat to us? Shouldn’t he instead be saying to Iran: “We share your anxiety about having a nuclear armed neighbour like Israel, with its 400 warheads, menacing your country. You have our solidarity.”

Cameron is a self-declared Zionist and, from his various remarks, thinks nothing of putting Israel’s interests, no matter how unlawful and menacing, ahead of the UK’s and allowing us to be drawn into conflict with Israel’s enemies such as Iran and Syria.

No respectable nation can operate a foreign policy on such a twisted basis. How many more of our young men have to shed blood, limbs and life to serve the foolish ambitions, ill-advised friendships and private commitments of our politicians?

Hysterical Iran-bashing

The ludicrous idea that Iran is the enemy was spouted several years ago by Liam Fox while shadow secretary of state for defence: “We must remember that in the battle for the values that we stand for – for democracy against theocracy, for democratic liberal values against repression – Israel’s enemies are our enemies and this is a battle in which we all stand together or we will all fall divided.” After Cameron appointed him defence secretary, Fox came to grief over the scandal of his close relationship with Adam Werritty, his so-called adviser. It was revealed that Werrity, among other misdeeds, had been involved in secret meetings with Mossad agents for the purpose of enlisting British support for an Israeli attack on Iran.

By no stretch of the imagination is Iran an enemy of the British people, but could soon be if Cameron and his foreign secretary, William Hague, persist with economic sanctions that needlessly hurt the Iranian people and inflict the kind of suffering heaped upon Iraq’s women and children for 12 years before we bombed them to hell and back. Is that what they are trying to engineer?

Israel, as people are beginning to realize, has a vast nuclear arsenal, won’t sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (but Iran has done so) and won’t submit to UN inspection and safeguards. Moreover Cameron is comfortable about rewarding Israel for its crimes against humanity. He even provides a safe haven for its criminals, contrary to the UK’s solemn obligation under the Geneva Conventions.

Israel flag waving

Pro-Israel politicians here still repeat the big lie that Iran threatened to wipe Israel off the map. Former Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad actually said, rather poetically, that the regime in Jerusalem (i.e. the Zionist regime) must vanish from the page of time. As Western powers regularly use regime change as an excuse to make wa, either directly or by proxy, against any country they don’t like… why is Ahmadinejad’s remark so objectionable?

Cameron’s senior partner in the UK government’s hysterical Iran-bashing campaign, William Hague, has been an avid admirer of Israel since his schooldays. In 2011, in a keynote address on the theme “Sixty Years of British-Israeli Diplomatic Relations”, Hague said the UK’s relationship with Israel went far beyond the realm of diplomatic relations. “It is based on bonds between families and communities as well as shared values and common interests… This government is firmly opposed to those who seek to deligitimize Israel, and… we are firmly opposed to boycotts…“

Is aiding and defending a belligerent foreign power, land thief and serial abuser of human rights a listed policy in the Conservative Party manifesto?

His speech included the usual attempt to demonize Iran. “Iran’s treatment of its own people, as well as its attitude to Israel and posturing in the region show that it would be a disaster to let Iran acquire nuclear weapons.” He omitted to mention the hundreds of nuclear warheads at the fingertips of Israel’s delinquent leaders. “Iran should therefore not doubt the resolve of the international community to address the concerns about its nuclear programme…

“I never forget,” said Hague, “that Israel is a country that has been repeatedly attacked through its brief history, that has been at war with all its neighbours for some of its history and with some of its neighbours for all of its history.”

And whose fault is that?

Is aiding and defending a belligerent foreign power, land thief and serial abuser of human rights a listed policy in the Conservative Party manifesto? No. It is a private agenda for which Hague and Cameron have no popular mandate. And is terrorizing Iranian civilians with economic ruination, just for the hell of it (or because Israel wants it), Conservative policy? Well, I suppose it must be, otherwise Hague and Cameron would have been slapped down.

A friend dubbed the pair “Agent” Cameron and “Agent” Hague and the names have stuck. We can see why.

Netanyahu and almost the entire Israeli political establishment have achieved a new record in stupidity

 

THE GREATEST danger to Israel is not the putative Iranian nuclear bomb. The greatest danger is the stupidity of our leaders.

This is not a uniquely Israeli phenomenon. A great many of the world’s leaders are plain stupid, and always have been. Enough to look at what happened in Europe in July 1914, when an incredible accumulation of stupid politicians and incompetent generals plunged humanity into World War I.

But lately, Binyamin Netanyahu and almost the entire Israeli political establishment have achieved a new record in foolishness.

LET US start from the end.

Iran is the great victor. It has been warmly welcomed back into the family of civilized nations. Its currency, the rial, is jumping. Its prestige and influence in the region has become paramount. Its enemies in the Muslim world, Saudi Arabia and its gulf satellites, have been humiliated. Any military strike against it by anyone, including Israel, has become unthinkable.

The image of Iran as a nation of crazy ayatollahs, fostered by Netanyahu and Ahmadinejad, has disappeared. Iran now looks like a responsible country, led by sober and shrewd leaders.

Israel is the great loser. It has maneuvered itself into a position of total isolation. Its demands have been ignored, its traditional friends have distanced themselves. But above everything else, its relations with the US have been seriously damaged.

What Netanyahu and Co. are doing is almost unbelievable. Sitting on a very high branch, they are diligently sawing through it.

Much has been said about the total dependence of Israel on the US in almost all fields. But to grasp the immensity of the folly, one aspect in particular must be mentioned. Israel controls, in effect, the access to the US centers of power.

All nations, especially the smaller and poorer ones, know that to enter the halls of the American Sultan, in order to get aid and support, they have to bribe the doorkeeper. The bribe may be political (privileges from their ruler), economic (raw materials). diplomatic (votes in the UN), military (a base or intelligence “cooperation”), or whatever. If it is big enough, AIPAC will help to gain support from Congress.

This unparalleled asset rests solely on the perception of Israel’s unique position in the US. Netanyahu’s unmitigated defeat on US relations with Iran has badly damaged, if not destroyed, this perception. The loss is incalculable.

ISRAELI POLITICIANS, like most of their colleagues elsewhere, are not well versed in world history. They are party hacks who spend their lives in political intrigues. If they had studied history, they would not have built for themselves the trap into which they have now fallen.

I am tempted to boast that more than two years ago I wrote that any military attack on Iran, either by Israel or the US, is impossible But it was not prophesy, inspired by some unknown deity. It was not even very clever. It was just the result of a simple look at the map. The Strait of Hormuz.

Any military action against Iran was bound to lead to a major war, something in the category of Vietnam, in addition to the collapse of world oil supplies. Even if the US public had not been so war weary, in order to start such an adventure one would not only have to be a fool, but practically mad.

The military option is not “off the table” – it never was “on the table”. It was an empty pistol, and the Iranians knew this well.

The loaded weapon was the sanctions regime. It hurt the people. It convinced the supreme leader, Ali Husseini Khamenei, to completely change the regime and install a new and very different president.

The Americans realized this, and acted accordingly. Netanyahu, obsessed with the bomb, did not. Worse, he still does not.

If it is a symptom of madness to keep trying something that has failed again and again, we should start to worry about “King Bibi”.

TO SAVE itself from the image of utter failure, AIPAC has started to order its senators and congressmen to work out new sanctions to be instituted in some indefinite future.

The new leitmotif of the Israeli propaganda machine is that Iran is cheating. The Iranians just can’t do otherwise. Cheating is in their nature.

This might be effective, because it is based on deeply rooted racism. Bazaar is a Persian word, associated in the European mind with haggling and deception.

But the Israeli conviction that the Iranians are cheating is based on a more robust foundation: our own behavior. When Israel started in the 1950s to build up its own nuclear program, with the help of France, it had to deceive the whole world and did so with stunning effect.

By sheer coincidence – or perhaps not – Israel’s Channel 2 TV aired a very revealing story about this last Monday (just two days after the signing of the Geneva accord!) Its most prestigious program, “Fact”, interviewed the Israeli Hollywood producer, Arnon Milchan, a billionaire and Israeli patriot.

In the program, Milchan boasted of his work for Lakam, the Israeli intelligence agency which handled Jonathan Pollard. (Since then it has been dismantled). Lakam specialized in scientific espionage, and Milchan did invaluable service in procuring in secret and under false pretences the materials needed for the nuclear program which produced the Israeli bombs.

Milchan hinted at his admiration for the South African apartheid regime and at Israel’s nuclear cooperation with it. At the time, a possible nuclear explosion in the Indian Ocean near South Africa mystified American scientists, and there were theories (repeated only in whispers) about an Israeli-South African nuclear device.

A third party was the Shah of Iran, who also had nuclear ambitions. It is an irony of history that Israel helped Iran to take its first atomic steps.

Israeli leaders and scientists went to very great length to hide their nuclear activities. The Dimona reactor building was disguised as a textile factory. Foreigners brought to tour Dimona were deceived by false walls, hidden floors and such.

Therefore, when our leaders speak of deception, cheating and misleading, they know what they are talking about. They respect the Persian ability to do the same, and are quite convinced that this will happen. So are practically all Israelis, and especially the media commentators.

ONE OF the more bizarre aspects of the American-Israeli crisis is the Israeli complaint that the US has had a secret diplomatic channel with Iran “behind our back”.

If there were an international prize for chutzpah, this would be a strong contender.

The “world’s only superpower” had secret communications with an important country, and only belatedly informed Israel about it. What cheek! How dare they?!

The real agreement, so it seems, was not hammered out in the many hours of negotiation in Geneva, but in these secret contacts.

Our government, by the way, did not omit to boast that it knew about this all the time from its own intelligence sources. It hinted that these were Saudi. I would rather suspect that it came from one of our numerous informants inside the US administration.

Be that as it may, the assumption is that the US is obliged to inform Israel in advance about every step it takes in the Middle East. Interesting.

PRESIDENT OBAMA has obviously decided that sanctions and military threats can only go so far. I think he is right.

A proud nation does not submit to open threats. Faced with such a challenge, a nation tends to draw together in patriotic fervor and support its leaders, disliked as they may be. We Israelis would. So would any other nation.

Obama is banking on the Iranian regime-change that has already started. A new generation, which sees on the social media what is happening around the world, wants to take part in the good life. Revolutionary fervor and ideological orthodoxy fade with time, as we Israelis know only too well. It happened in our kibbutzim, it happened in the Soviet Union, it happens in China and Cuba. Now it is also happening in Iran.

SO WHAT should we do? My advice would simply be: if you can’t beat them, join them.

Stop the Netanyahu obsession. Embrace the Geneva deal (because it is good for Israel). Call off the AIPAC bloodhounds from Capitol Hill. Support Obama. Mend the relations with the US administration. And, most importantly, send out feelers to Iran to change, ever so slowly, our mutual relations.

History shows that yesterday’s friends may be today’s enemies, and today’s enemies can be tomorrow’s allies. It already happened once between Iran and us. Apart from ideology, there is no real clash of interests between the two nations.

We need a change of leadership, like the one Iran has begun to embark on. Unfortunately, all Israeli politicians, left and right, have joined the March of Fools. Not a single establishment voice has been raised against it. The new Labor Party leader, Yitzhak Herzog, is part of it as much as Ya’ir Lapid and Tzipi Livni.

As they say in Yiddish: The fools would have been amusing, if they had not been our fools.

Jenin: Palestinian Authority Crackdown on Anti-Negotiations Activists

A Palestinian boys rides a bicycle near building materials on the street outside new houses which are part of a project funded by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in the southern Gaza Strip town of Rafah on November 21, 2013. (Photo: AFP – Said Khatib)
Published Friday, November 29, 2013
In the West Bank’s Jenin refugee camp, the Palestinian Authority is conducting a security campaign. Its objective: apprehend activists and resistance members who oppose the US-brokered Palestinian negotiations with Israel.
Jenin – Since the resumption of negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government in July, there have been several achievements: 17 Palestinian martyrs (three of whom died Tuesday at the hands of Israeli troops); 400 Palestinians detained by Israel; and 50 Palestinians detained by the Palestinian Authority.
Meanwhile, settlement activity continues unabated in Jerusalem and other West Bank cities without any regard for the promises made by the broker of the negotiations, the US administration, in order to get the Palestinian Authority to return to the negotiating table.
Expressing any opposition to the negotiations by the public or Palestinian political groups has become taboo. As a result, scores of people have been detained by the Palestinian Authority to ensure negotiations can continue smoothly.
Deferring to the Road Map
As a result of the changes taking place on the ground, the Fatah faction opposed to negotiations has put increasing pressure on Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. The meetings of the movement’s Central Committee saw some stormy discussions about the usefulness of the negotiations, as well as the powers entrusted to the negotiating team, which answers directly to the president alone, rendering it effectively immune to accountability.
This coincides with the radical transformations of resistance factions in the West Bank that have been taking place since 2005: Amnesty for wanted fugitives, assimilation of fighters into security agencies, and high salaries in return for laying down arms, were all sufficient to create a new balance of power tipped in favor of President Abbas within Fatah.
However, this situation did not emerge from a vacuum, and is in fact considered to be the essence of the “road map for peace” plan. In truth, without such measures, none of the plan’s provisions could be implemented.
Between 2002 and 2005, a new faction emerged within the Palestinian Authority that was more enthusiastic about fulfilling the dream of Israel’s generals to end the intifada and abolish armed resistance groups inside the areas controlled by the Palestinian Authority. This was required by the “road map for peace” plan, which explicitly required the Palestinians to put an end to what it termed “violence and terrorism,” calling on Palestinian security agencies to combat any act of resistance against the Israelis.
Dismantling the infrastructure of resistance movements was a kind of temptation offered to Abbas to strengthen his authority. As time passed and the Palestinian security services failed to completely eliminate resistance infrastructure, especially in the refugee camps, the resistance became a real burden that had to be eliminated.
In 2009, this burden worsened when Abbas entered into talks with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on the border issue. An agreement was reached over deploying an international peacekeeping force on the border between Palestine and Israel, stipulating that the Palestinian state must be demilitarized, with the exception of arms necessary for a police force.
However, Olmert resigned before a final agreement could be reached over the borders. The government of Benjamin Netanyahu did not recognize the security agreement between Abbas and Olmert, and asked for the negotiations to restart from scratch.
The Refugee Camps: A Security Burden
Negotiations returned to square one, with the first round taking place between the two sides in occupied Jerusalem after a three-year freeze. Nevertheless, officials in Israel soon announced that they would step up construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and occupied East Jerusalem.
On the Palestinian side, after receiving an aid package worth $4 billion meant to help the Palestinian Authority overcome its financial crisis, the stage had to be set politically for the resumption of the negotiations, with help from the US security team formed in 2005 to assist the Palestinian Authority rehabilitate its security agencies and dismantle the infrastructure of the resistance. Soon after, a security campaign began against anti-negotiations activists.
This was corroborated by the commander of al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Jenin, Zakaria al-Zubaidi, in a September 4 interview with the Israeli newspaper Maariv. Zubaidi told the newspaper that the Palestinian Authority was arresting members who openly opposed the negotiations.
Speaking to Al-Akhbar, Palestinian Legislative Council member Jamal Huwail said, “The Jenin camp will remain pro-resistance, and will defend itself against sustained violations and raids by the occupation.” Huwail also said, “The negotiations accompanied by continued breaches by the occupation cannot continue. The Palestinian Authority must discontinue negotiations.”
In turn, Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Ahmad al-Mudallal toldAl-Akhbar, “The Palestinian Authority and its security services are supplementing the Israeli occupation’s role in persecuting the resistance, in parallel with intensifying Judaization campaigns against Islamic and Christian holy sites in occupied Jerusalem.”
Mudallal held security services in the West Bank fully responsible for the lives of resistance fighters who are being pursued by the Palestinian Authority in Jenin. He then called on “resistance fighters in the Jenin camp to stand up to the crackdown, and try to prevent the security agencies from entering the homes of the resistance fighters and citizens in any way to arrest or liquidate them.”
 
Zubaidi, Huwail, and Mudallal’s remarks prove that the camp and the negotiations are moving along two paths that can never converge. But at the same time, one inevitably has to triumph over the other.
Indeed, the presence of anti-negotiations activists is something that will not please the US security team, and will not be conducive to imposing any political solution on the ground. This will no doubt prompt more pressure on the Palestinian Authority to eliminate this burden. In other words, things are on course to erupt and spiral out of control.
The Policy of the Status Quo
With Israel giving the green light to more than 20,000 new settlement units in Jerusalem and the West Bank, the Jewish state’s confiscation of hundreds of acres, and the displacement of dozens of Palestinian families, the crisis between the Palestinian and Israeli sides has reached new levels. At least, this is what the pro-Palestinian Authority media claimed, as the Palestinian negotiations team announced it would be resigning after taking part in 20 rounds of talks since July 2013.
In addition, there is strong opposition to the negotiations, both in Fatah and among the Palestinian public at large, something that the Palestinian security services have not been able to influence decisively. All that remains for Abbas is to maintain the status quo, which means continuing the negotiations even after the resignation of chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat.
The resignation of Palestinian negotiators will not lead to the negotiations’ collapse. To be sure, Abbas could issue a presidential decree appointing a new negotiating team that would continue to hold talks. Meanwhile, the crackdown would against anti-negotiations activists would continue, serving to forestall wider popular opposition that could evolve into a full-scale intifada.
The Palestinian Press Fuels Security Crackdown
When Jenin Governor Maj. Gen. Talal Dweikat announced the launch of the security campaign in the Jenin refugee camp to “eliminate lawlessness,” the Palestinian press quickly touted the crackdown as a “necessary evil.” For days, radio programs joined in the attempt to isolate resistance fighters and anti-negotiations activists, demonizing the latter as subversive elements who must be apprehended.
A poll conducted by the Jerusalem Center for Information and Communication showed that 50.5 percent of Palestinians believe that the Palestinian Authority’s decision to resume talks with Israel was “wrong.” The same poll showed that 68.7 percent of respondents believe that the negotiations would not reach an agreement with Israel, compared to 20.8 percent who believed they would.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.
 

Weekly report on Israel’s terrorism against the State of Palestine

PCHR Weekly Report: 3 Palestinians killed, 12 wounded by Israeli forces this week

 Friday November 29, 2013 10:28 by PCHR-Gaza

In its Weekly Report On Israeli Human Rights Violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories for the week of 21- 27 Nov. 2013, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) found that Israeli forces killed 3 Palestinian civilians in Yatta, south of Hebron.

                   Olive trees uprooted by Israeli troops in Bethlehem (PCHR photo)

Olive trees uprooted by Israeli troops in Bethlehem (PCHR photo)

In addition, 12 Palestinians were wounded – including a Palestinian child who was wounded in Qarawet Bani Zaid village, northwest of Ramallah, and 2 Palestinian civilians who were wounded in the northern Gaza Strip.
Israeli attacks in the West Bank:
In the West Bank, in a new crime of extra-judicial execution, on 26 November 2013, Israeli forces killed 2 Palestinian civilians in Hebron by targeting their vehicle, north of Yatta village, south of the city.
Half an hour later, in an excessive use of force, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian civilian in the south of Hebron. After examination of the crime scene, it was found that Israeli forces had opened fire randomly at the victim while he was walking near a targeted house. He was hit by a number of bullets causing his death before he was taken to the hospital. According to medical sources at the hospital, al-Najjar was hit by a bullet to the left side of his chest, 3 bullets to chest and a bullet to the right shoulder. In addition, part of his head was taken out as he was pulled by an Israeli robot.
In the same context, on 23 November 2013, 5 civilians, including 2 children, were wounded when dozens of boys gathered at the southern entrance of al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah, and clashed with Israeli forces.
On 23 November 2013, a Palestinian child was wounded by 2 bullets to the left leg when Israeli forces moved into Qarawet Bani Zaid village, northwest of Ramallah.
Israeli forces conducted 64 incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank. At least 46 Palestinians, including 10 children, were abducted in the West Bank.
Israeli forces established dozens of checkpoints in the West Bank. At least 5 Palestinian civilians, including 2 children, were abducted at checkpoints in the West Bank.
Israeli attacks in the Gaza Strip:
In the Gaza Strip, on 23 November 2013, Israeli forces abducted 3 Palestinian children from Gaza valley (Johr al-Deek), as they crossed through the border fence. The children were questioned and then released 3 hours later via Beit Hanoun (Erez) crossing.
Israeli navy forces have continued targeting Palestinian fishermen in the sea. 2 Palestinian fishermen were abducted off the fishing port in Rafah in the south of the Gaza Strip.
Israel has continued to impose a total closure and has isolated the Gaza Strip from the outside world. The illegal closure of the Gaza Strip, which has steadily tightened since June 2007 has had a disastrous impact on the humanitarian and economic situation in the Gaza Strip. The Israeli authorities impose measures to undermine the freedom of trade, including the basic needs for the Gaza Strip population and the agricultural and industrial products to be exported. For 7 consecutive years, Israel has tightened the land and naval closure to isolate the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, and other countries around the world. This resulted in a grave violation of the economic, social and cultural rights and a deterioration of living conditions for 1.7 million people. The Israeli authorities has established Karm Abu Salem (Kerem Shaloum) as the sole crossing for imports and exports in order to exercise its control over the Gaza Strip’s economy that has been aggravating for years due to the shortage of imports. They also aim at imposing a complete ban on the Gaza Strip’s exports.
Israeli settlement activities:
Israeli forces have continued to support settlement activities in the West Bank and Israeli settlers have continued to attack Palestinian civilians and property.
On 25 November 2013, Israeli forces bulldozed a 300-square meter tin barrack, west of Ezna village, west of Hebron, belonging to Nader Mohammed Mahmoud Faraj Allah under the pretext of having no license, and he was not allowed to vacate his belongings. Israeli forces also confiscated a 410 Mercedes car loaded with pieces of steel.
On the same day, Israeli forces bulldozed a 40-square meter house comprised of a room, kitchen and bathroom belonging to Ashraf Mohammed Yousif al-Batran in al-Ra’s neighborhood, west of the village, and a 160-squre-meter tin barrack under the pretext of unlicensed construction.
On 23 November 2013, a group of settlers, under heavy guard of Israeli forces, attacked members of ‘Awad Faily and number of Israeli solidarity activists from “Co-existence” and “Yashin Dove” movements, while heading to Qweiwes area, east of Yatta, south of Hebron. As a result, some of them sustained bruises, and 5 of them, including 3 children, were abducted.
On the same day, a large group of settlers from “Beit Eil” settlement, north of al-Birah, threw stones at Palestinian cars. Israeli soldiers then intervened to control settlers and evacuate them from the aforementioned area. Neither injuries nor vehicle damages were reported.
On 24 November 2013, residents of Borqin village, west of Salfit, found out that a group of settlers from “Brokhin” settlement, chopped down 10 olive trees belonging to ‘Abdullah Mohammed ‘Othman Sheikh ‘Omer (65) in Baqdounis Valley area, north of the aforementioned village.
On 25 November 2013, , a group of settlers from “Givat Ranim” outpost extended from “Brakha” settlement, northeast of Bourin village, south of Nablus, attacked a house belonging to the family of Ghassan Mustafa ‘Emran, at which they threw stones and a Molotov cocktail.
On the same day, Israeli forces confiscated 120 square meters of construction bricks of al-Dirat village, northeast of Yata, south of Hebron, under the pretext of building a mosque without a construction permit.
On 26 November 2013, around 30 settlers from “Nokadim” settlement, east of Taqou’a village, southeast of Bethlehem, and “Tekwa’a” settlement, northeast of the aforementioned village, chopped down around 200 olive trees aged between 30 to 60 years under the Israeli forces’ protection.
Israeli attacks on non-violent demonstrations:
Israeli forces have continued to use excessive force against peaceful protesters in the West Bank. 3 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were wounded in protests in Bil’in village, west of Ramallah, and Kofur Qaddoum village, northeast of Qalqilia. 5 civilians, including 2 children, were wounded in al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah.
Moreover, Israeli forces continued the systematic use of excessive force against peaceful protests organised by Palestinian, Israeli and international activists against the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities in the West Bank. As a result, 3 civilians, including a child, were wounded. Two of the civilians were wounded during a protest in Kofur Qaddoum village, northeast of Qalqilia, while the third was wounded during a protest in Bil’in village, west of Ramallah.
Following the Friday Prayer, 22 November 2013, dozens of Palestinian civilians and international and Israeli human rights defenders organised a peaceful demonstration in Bil’in, west of Ramallah, in protest at the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities. Demonstrators took the streets raising the Palestinian flags and headed to the liberated territories near the annexation wall. Israeli forces had closed all the entrances of the village since morning to prevent the Palestinian and international activists and journalists from participating in the demonstration. Demonstrators marched adjacent to the cement wall and tried to cross the fence before Israeli forces that are stationed behind the wall, in the western area, and a large number of soldiers deployed along it fired live bullets, tear gas canisters, rubber-coated steel bullets, sound bombs and skunk water at them and chased them in olive fields. As a result, an 18-year-old civilian was wounded by a bullet to the back. Moreover, dozens of civilians suffered tear gas inhalation and others sustained bruises due to being beaten up by Israeli soldiers.
On the same day, dozens of Palestinian civilians organised a peaceful demonstration in the middle of Ni’lin village, west of Ramallah, in protest at the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities. Demonstrators took the streets and headed to the annexation wall. Israeli forces closed the gates of the wall with barbwires and prevented the demonstrators from passing to the land behind it before they responded by throwing stones. As a result, many civilians suffered tear gas inhalation and bruises.
Around the same time, dozens of Palestinian civilians and Israeli and international human rights defenders organised a peaceful demonstration, in protest at the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities, in Nabi Saleh village, northwest of Ramallah. Demonstrators took the streets raising the Palestinian flags and chanting slogans against the occupation and in support of the Palestinian unity, and they then headed to the lands that the settlers are trying to rob by force near “Halmish” settlement. Israeli forces had closed all the entrances of the village since morning to prevent the Palestinian and international activists and journalists from participating in the demonstration. When they arrived at the land, the demonstrators were met by live bullets, tear gas canisters, rubber-coated steel bullets, sound bombs and skunk water and were chased into the village. As a result, a number of civilians suffered tear gas inhalation and others sustained bruises due to being beaten up by Israeli soldiers.
Following the Friday prayer, dozens of Palestinian civilians and international and Israeli human rights defenders organised a peaceful demonstration in Ma’sara village, in protest at the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities. The demonstration started in front of the Candles Cultural Centre in the centre of the village. Demonstrators moved in the streets raising the Palestinian flag. When they arrived at the area where the annexation wall is established, Israeli forces started firing tear gas canisters in attempt to disperse them and prevented the demonstrators from reaching the annexation wall. A number of civilians suffered tear gas inhalation.
At approximately 12:30 on the same day, Palestinian civilians and international activists organised a peaceful demonstration in the centre of Kufor Qaddoum village, northwest of Qalqilia, and headed towards the eastern entrance of the village, in protest at the continued closure of the entrance with an iron gate, since the beginning of the Aqsa Intifada. Clashes erupted between the demonstrators and Israeli forces that fired sound bombs and tear gas canisters to prevent them from reaching the aforementioned gate. As a result, 2 civilians, including a child, were wounded. The 17-year-old civilian was hit by a gas canister to the back and the 20-year-old civilian was hit by a gas canister to the belly.
Recommendations to the international community:
Due to the number and severity of Israeli human rights violations this week, the PCHR made several recommendations to the international community. Among these were a recommendation that the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council explicitly declare that the Israeli closure policy in Gaza and the annexation wall in the West Bank are illegal, and accordingly refer the two issues to the UN Security Council to impose sanctions on Israel to compel it to remove them.
In addition, the PCHR calls upon the international community, in light of its failure to the stop the aggression on the Palestinian people, to at least fulfill its obligation to reconstruct the Gaza Strip after the series of hostilities launched by Israel which directed targeted the civilian infrastructure
The full text of the report,

 

Israel Spies on the “World” in Lebanon

A picture taken from Lebanon in Adaysseh on the Lebanese-Israeli border shows an Israeli soldier patrolling in an armoured vehicle along the border on August 23, 2013 after the Israeli air force launched a rocket toward a Palestinian group in Lebanon. (Photo: AFP – Mahmoud Zayyat)
Published Friday, November 29, 2013
The Lebanese parliament invited diplomats and representatives of UNIFIL on Thursday, November 28 to deliver a brief on the extent of Israeli espionage in Lebanon that has come to include their embassies and installations.
In a closed Lebanese parliamentary session hosted by the telecommunications and foreign affairs subcommittees, 27 representatives of foreign diplomatic missions were presented with evidence that Israel has been eavesdropping on their communications, monitoring citizens and state institutions alike
Not surprisingly, US Ambassador David Hale failed to attend the meeting, possibly due to the likelihood that his government is keenly aware of Israel’s intensive espionage program in Lebanon and may even receive reports from the Zionist state, according to Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah, who heads up the media and telecommunications committee in parliament.
 
The diplomats were informed of how Israel has recently intensified its illegal spying activity, particularly along the border with Lebanon, where it has erected dozens of listening posts with the latest eavesdropping technology. Israel’s appetite for information has now gone beyond spying on Lebanese to include the country’s diplomatic missions and the communications of the UNIFIL force stationed in the South.
The session did not take more than half an hour, as it was limited to a presentation, without any discussion scheduled to follow. Although none of the ambassadors issued any statements to the press after the briefing, they appeared unsettled as they exited the hall. According to a parliamentary source, it is unlikely that many of those present were aware of the scale of Israeli monitoring.
The source says that the parliamentary committees, which is in charge of following up on Israel’s eavesdropping activity, left little doubt in the mind of their foreign guests, as they were presented with “a detailed explanation of the ways by which they are being monitored.”
The intent of the meeting, Fadlallah explained in a press conference, “is to provide these countries with the information necessary to help us limit this Israeli aggression on Lebanon,” with the hope that they put some pressure on Tel Aviv to stop its intensive spying campaign.
There is also talk about raising the matter before the UN and possibly making a bid to expel Israel from the International Telecommunications Union. As for what role the Resistance can play in limiting Israel’s eavesdropping, Fadlallah repeated the words of Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah, who recently said that the matter is in the hands of the state, which is more than capable of dealing with the issue.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Der Attiyeh Cleaned

Talfita Der Attiyeh Cleaned

The Syrian Arab Army had to carry out a swift operation and clean the town of Der Attiyeh from the NATO-backed mercenary terrorists coming from all sides of the planet to ‘democratize’ Syria Somali-style. The city is restored but the terrorists left their trade mark all over.
Der Attiyeh was punished by the anti-Islamic Wahhabi terrorists for not joining their ‘peaceful revolution’ against the Syrian state and remained absolutely loyal to their country and their people.
Throughout the Syrian crisis and since the beginning, this town and many other towns in the area, just like most of the cities all over Syria, have stood against the western-backed mercenary thugs despite the unprecedented media campaign to demonize the Syrian state and the Syrian Arab Army. Just a proof of how short-sighted the western officials and their strategists are thinking Syrians are less smarter and for that same reason they had to deface themselves and officially and publicly reveal their links to terrorists groups like Al-Qaeda and others where they had to import tens of thousands of these less-fortunate, uneducated poor young men, brainwash them and turn them into killing machines in the name of G.O.D, their God: Gold, Oil and Diamond.
Like Talfita, Yabrud, Nabk, Qara and other cities cleaned from the terrorists within the long awaited Qalamon battle, Der Attiyeh not less important than the others being in the crossroads for terrorists sneaking into Syria from Lebanon and connecting the Jordanian desert with the infested Lebanese mountains creating Wahhabistan enclaves. Der Attiyeh sits as well on the international Damascus – Homs Highway north of Damascus city and south and very close to Nabk. Terrorists were aiming to cut south of Syria including the capital Damacus from its north starting with Homs.
Another main reason for attacking this town was to raise the morals leftover of the terrorists whom were losing one town after the other against the Syrian Arab Army all over the country.
Innocent civilians were killed, the entire medical crew of Al-Bassil National Hospital with whomever patients were in the hospital at the time. Of course, such a heinous massacre would not make it to the western headlines as it would show the US, UK, French and other European taxpayer where their money is actually invested, rather in the welfare and healthcare programs of its people.
The following video report might contain Graphic images, we tried to cover the ugly scenes as much as possible, your discretion is advised (Click here to watch on YouTube):

‘Everybody else is happy as long as the Syrian crisis is confined within Syrian borders’, only Syrians are paying this hefty price in the face of the international terrorism axis led by the ‘humanitarian bastards‘.

The taboo on boycotting Israel has been broken

http://electronicintifada.net/content/taboo-boycotting-israel-has-been-broken/12949

David Lloyd    

  

26 November 2013 

  

131125-john-kerry-gaza.jpg

The American International School in Gaza, visited by then-Senator John Kerry in 2009, is one of hundreds of Palestinian educational institutions that have been bombed by Israel.

                (Ashraf Amra / APA images)              

Something extraordinary happened on Saturday evening at the American Studies Association’s annual meeting in Washington, DC.

At a packed open meeting called by the ASA’s National Executive Council to discuss a resolution to “endorse and honor” the Palestinian call for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions, speaker after speaker rose to express strong support for the resolution.

They urged the council to vote on it without further delay or deferral.

Israel and US complicity

Out of 44 speakers, whose names were submitted in writing and then drawn at random from a box, 37 spoke in favor of the boycott. They ranged from senior professors to graduate students and even undergraduate members of the association. All recalled the association’s fundamental commitment to the study and critique of racism and the US histories of imperialism and settler colonialism.

Many made the connection between Israel as a settler colony and US complicity in politically and materially supporting its colonial projects. In doing so, several remarked that they were members of the association because its commitment to anti-racist and anti-colonial scholarship made it especially hospitable to their work. For them, the connection was self-evident between anti-racist work within the United States and solidarity work with the victims of a settler colonial project that has the fullest support of the United States.

Over and over, speakers refuted the charge that endorsing the boycott is a contradiction that engages in limiting academic freedom in the name of academic freedom. They pointed out that this assertion is simply false, in the face of a campaign of misrepresentation evidenced in the room by a “Frequently Asked Questions” flyer opposing the resolution. That campaign implied that the boycott targets individuals on account of their national belonging or identity.

If anything, the resolution stands to further academic freedom — in particular that of Palestinians whose access to normal scholarly life is continually infringed by occupation, blockade, collective punishment in the form of school closures, and the denial of the fundamental right to travel. No Israeli scholar would be denied the right to express or publish an opinion, attend a conference, do research, or travel wherever they wished.

Speaking without fear

But the most significant thing about this event was that already it showed that engaging in the boycott, and even in discussion of the boycott, is an extension of academic freedom.

Despite years of lawfare in which pro-Israel lobbies and pressure groups have tried to shut down any criticism of Israel and refused to debate the facts, those who spoke at this meeting felt free to voice their opinions and their experiences without fear of harassment or recrimination.

It was deeply moving to hear younger scholars, graduates and undergraduates, one after the other, express feelings of liberation and legitimation. They were finally able to speak and to hear others speak publicly about an issue that has for so long been the third rail not only of US politics, but of academic discourse.

Palestinian academic freedom is our freedom

Opponents of the boycott tend to focus on its potential impact on the relatively privileged Israeli scholars, who will in fact only feel an impact in so far as they act as ambassadors for the Israeli state. For once, on Saturday, it was the actually restricted academic freedom of Palestinian scholars that was on the table. And it became clear that the extension of academic freedom to Palestinians is at the same time the extension of our own academic freedom here in the United States.

In a letter to the National Council, available at the meeting, opponents of the boycott claimed to have some fifty supporters. The petition in favor of the resolution had already amassed 850. What is missing even in that huge majority of supporters is the large number of scholars who would have wished to support the boycott, but dared not sign on for fear of intimidation or retaliation.

Ending the blockade on debate

The ASA’s open meeting was a clear indication that the time of fear and of the blockade on debate may be over — and that there is a new climate in which critical discussion of Israel’s policies towards Palestine will no longer be taboo.

But something yet more significant happened. The fifty or so opponents of the boycott claimed the support of “several former presidents, Council members, and ASA award winners.” The speakers in favor of the resolution did not appeal to such institutional or official authority, though many indeed could have.

What they appealed to was a sense of justice, of consistency with our values. They invoked the principle of solidarity with the oppressed, as the ASA encourages — and what everyone recognizes is the very condition of anti-racist work.

Time after time, speakers saw support for the resolution not as potentially divisive but as an enhancement of the meaning and significance of their association and of the relevance and value of scholarship itself. As one speaker put it, support for the boycott by the ASA would renew her belief in the meaning of scholarship itself — at a time when we are called to an increasingly professionalized separation of our intellectual work from our moral and political commitments.

Any association always runs the risk of becoming merely an institution, with its protocols and procedures and traditions. As an institution settles into its routines, it ossifies and forgets the values that brought people together to form it. What happened at the ASA on Saturday night reminded us that an association is not just a means to certain professional ends, but a voluntary gathering together of people with shared intellectual values and commitments.

To participate in that gathering was indeed a deeply re-energizing experience, renewing one’s faith both in the possibilities of that particular association and in the capacity for intellectual work to be at once scholarly and engaged with the world.

Attacks

At the time of writing, it remains unsure what the ASA’s National Council will decide regarding the resolution, though there is no doubt that the open meeting gave them a ringing endorsement should they decide to pass it.

But, already and predictably, attacks on the association have commenced. Based on past experience, few of the attacks will engage with the substance of the resolution — or with the facts of Israel’s ongoing denial of academic freedom to Palestinians and its relentless assault on the rights of a people to reproduce its cultural and intellectual life.

By and large, Zionists have refused to debate and have ceded that ground to their opponents. Instead, they rely increasingly on other means, predominantly legal and institutional harassment, to close down debate, force student senates to rescind democratically approved divestment resolutions, or punish students and academics for criticizing Israel.

There is no doubt that Zionist organizations have great power and the material resources to enable them to engage in a forceful assault on the American Studies Association.

But in the intellectual world, the resort to force is not a position of strength. Saturday evening at the ASA showed the power of reasoned, moral argument. And there is no going back from that. In the struggle for justice for the Palestinian people, a turning point has been achieved.

David Lloyd is Distinguished Professor of English at University of California, Riverside

OWEN JONES & MOTHER AGNES. A LESSON ON “CONCILIATORY LEFTISTS”

Posted on November 27, 2013 by Alexandra Valiente

Editorial Comment:
I published Phil Greaves’ article because it highlights the hypocrisy of the “left”, however, one of the links leads to a blog called “Intervention Watch”. The blogger there is confused about these wars, apparently not familiar with the people, their cultures, the nature of their struggles or the agenda of the countries perpetrating against them. He was not sure whether he believed Mother Agnes Miriam. I saw no evidence that he took the time to investigate her work or read the meticulous report she compiled. (See the links below this article.)
When it comes to Libya, he is out of his depth. He published a poll that concluded Libyans feel they are worse off now than they were under Gaddafi.
Having taken the time to read this survey and aware of how grotesquely it misrepresented the reality of the situation in Libya, I posted a comment asking questions that exposed the fraudulent nature of the poll itself and the agenda behind it. My comment was not published, although he decided to approve a correction that was intended to be added to my comment, but would otherwise be meaningless separate from it.
Intervention Watch is not opposed to all interventions, but is sometimes an apologist for the left and a gatekeeper who conceals critical facts and verifiable evidence from his readers.
Alexandra Valiente
COURTESY OF 
SYRIA-CONFLICT-DAMASCUS-REFUGEES
Following the news that Mother Agnes Miriam, a nun who heads the Musalaha (reconciliation) initiative in Syria, was due to speak at the Stop The War conference in London, two journalists also due to speak at the event, Jeremy Scahill and Owen Jones, decided to withdraw participation unless Mother Agnes was removed from the speaking list. At the time of writing, neither “journalist” has offered to explain their act of public censure and decision to bolster Zionist-led smear campaigns; aside from a few tweets expressing their “concern” over sharing a platform with an evil Assad-supporting nun. It seems baseless conspiracy theories are more than acceptable in the higher echelons of “professional” journalism, as long as the target of said conspiracy is a supporter of an enemy state of the west and Israel.
The justification for this blatant act of censorship came in the form of a crass campaign of smear and character assassination. One primarily led by outright Israeli/Neo-Conservative propagandist-extraordinaire Michael D. Weiss, a former Director of a now defunct Zionist pressure group called Just Journalism, whose stated goals included focusing on “how Israel and Middle East issues are reported in the UK media.” Weiss, also a former fellow at the Neo-Conservative war-lobby “think-tank” the Henry Jackson Society, is now a lead rebel advocate pimping his “expertise” at Saudi Arabia/Hariri propaganda outlet NOW Lebanon – all whilst writing up US military intervention proposals for the Syrian opposition. It is also no coincidence that Mr. Weiss was a lead proponent of the fairy-tale narratives of one Liz OBagy, an utter fraud sanitizing the image of the rebels on behalf of a US State Department funded rebel lobbying group and the equally hawkish Neo-Conservative PR outlet The Institute for the Study of War. Needless to say, Weiss, and his cabal of pro-rebel Hariri propagandists and Zionist apologists are more than pleased at Jones and Scahill’s somewhat orchestrated decision to pressure Stop the War into dropping Mother Agnes.
Mother Agnes, according to the plethora of pro-rebel US and Zionist media accounts, is an evil “Assad apologist”. As a result of Agnes’ support of the Syrian government and calls for peaceful reconciliation, the Al Qaeda apologists rife within western and Israeli media took it upon themselves to instigate a campaign of hatred-filled smear and baseless accusation.
Since the onset of the Syrian conflict, Mother Agnes has made efforts to combat the skewed narratives emerging from corrupt western, Israeli, and Gulf Oil and Gas media – not least regarding the controversial issue of the alleged chemical weapons attacks in Ghouta, Damascus. Contrary to the smears, Agnes doesn’t deny people died during the incident, nor offer a complete alternative narrative. Her questions surrounding the event are entirely focused on the many inconsistencies and inaccuracies within the “official narrative” and the dubious YouTube videos touted as impartial evidence. It seems the CIA were also less than convinced of the US governments “assessment”; so much so that a mass resignation was threatened if their name was attached to John Kerry’s dodgy dossier. Furthermore, a considerable open source collaborative effort to determine the perpetrator of the alleged chemical weapons attack has drawn the logical, and somewhat scientific conclusion that only the rebels could have been responsible. In addition, the much politicised UN report that attempted to point the finger at the Syrian army has also come under much scrutiny from highly qualified avenues for its poor methodologies and misleading conclusions. Regardless of all the  above, the fact Mother Agnes actually resides in Syria, is the head of an organisation that has mediated between warring factions and enabled the safe evacuation of civilians, and consistently calls for peaceful reconciliation and dialogue, doesn’t count for much in the eyes of rabid western pundits eager to demonize anyone that dare question, or offer a counter narrative to their fabrication-laden fantasies on Syria.
The self-described “leftist” UK political commentator Owen Jones has written virtually nothing on the Syrian conflict. His understanding of events is largely based on the dominant narratives portrayed in western media. No doubt, like any self-respecting petty bourgeois leftist of London, Jones gets his information from the wests supposed liberal establishment newspapers, who in recent years have stood proudly alongside right-wing media in cheerleading for disastrous western-led wars of aggression. The conflict in Syria has been no exception, the Guardian’s totally skewed coverage,  that lends more from Whitehall/CIA/Mossad talking points than it does reality, has been well documented and debunked. Accordingly, Jones’ ideas on Syria fall in line with this narrative: yes, the “Islamist rebels” are BAD guys (meaning there are some GOOD moderate guys that nobody can find yet, or, in Owen’s case even name), but Assad is a dictator, a war criminal, “barbarous”, “he needs to go”. Any reflection on cause and effect; the long and relevant historical context of US-led subversion and instigation of terrorist insurgencies in the name of “revolution”; or the underlying geopolitical dynamics that helped to create and exacerbate the extremist-led insurgency is far too much nuance for Jones’ simplistic binary narratives: Assad is BAD, and anyone that supports the Syrian government or refuses to support its ouster through coercion or violence is also BAD, by definition. What then, do Jones’ simplistic definitions mean for the millions of Syrians that still support their President and government? Well, like the nun, they are obviously evil and severely misguided. I mean, what would they know, Living in Syria and all? This stance of vulgar superiority is indicative of the vast undercurrent of western bourgeois Orientalism which still oozes from the pores of western media and its decrepit “journalists” when their stance on “others” threatens to detriment their self-imposed “credibility”.
The informative blog “Interventions Watch”, explores Jones’ apparent moral confusion further:
Jones is a member and supporter of the Labour party, and thinks other leftiesshould be as well. As is hardly a secret, Labour is a party that plays host to plenty of major war criminals and apologists for those war criminals, but that apparently isn’t enough for him to want to part ways with them. Indeed, he has in the past quite happily appeared on platforms with John Prescott, who was deputy Prime Minister at the time of the aggression against Iraq – not just an apologist for war crimes then, but an active participant in them.
Yet this predicament seems completely lost on Jones. In one instance, he is a paid-up member of a UK political party that played a lead role in no less than genocide; in an act of military and economic aggression on Iraq totally against International Law, not to mention morality. He sits beside these politicians and pleads with leftist thinkers to join them and “change them from within”. A million or so Iraqi lives can be forgotten, there’s a few good eggs in this elitist manifestation of conciliatory Mensheviks, join us! But when it comes to possibly sharing a stage with a nun from Syria who happens to support her government and army in its fight against a foreign-funded, foreign instigated, foreign-led, and extremist dominated terrorist insurgency, Jones wont be part of it.
This bourgeois trait of selective free-speech through groupthink coercion is indicative of just how corrupt the western media system truly is. Supposed “leftist” anti-war commentators now feel they are an authority to dictate and pressure who should be able to participate in public events, and wilfully swallow the smears of Zionist propagandists rather than do their own research, or, heaven forbid, judge people on the content of what they are actually saying.
Evidently, Jones’ moral outrage is selective at best, one could convincingly argue its nothing more than careerist popularism – with a dash of orientalist superiority for good measure. Sure, sit next to war-criminals of “our” variety, you wont get smeared with the dreaded “apologist” brush in the elitist media you participate and benefit from – hell, most of their “barbarous” crimes are long forgotten, so not much to worry about. But sit next to a nun that supports a current enemy of the west? Forget it.
Stop the War have just released a statement confirming that Mother Agnes has “withdrawn” from the conference. Cheers to Zionist apologists of the apartheid state, propagandists of an Al Qaeda insurgency in Syria, and Owen Jones.

Turkey, which has been allowing terrorists to pass freely into Syria, now says they will be killed if they return

Special Turkish Military Forces To Eliminate Escaped Terrorists from Syria

syria-1004-art-g29jl42q-11004gfx-syria-turkey-map-1004-map-eps

Al-Quds/Al-Manar reports special military crews stationed along the Turkish-Syrian borders; their task is to execute escaped terrorists fleeing Syria. After a successful military operation and accurate tactical maneuvers, units of the Syrian armed forces managed to tighten control over most towns eliminating several terrorist groups with their hideouts and heavy weaponry causing dramatic collapse in the morale of the armed terrorist groups that are faltering under the strikes trying to escape and return back to their origin countries. Sources reports tens of terrorists have been executed trying to flee Syrian territory by those Turkish crews. Terrorist’s families in Turkey and Jordan were prevented from entering Syria to look for their sons or ask about them.

Zahhar’s discovery: Palestinian cause was a victim of the so-called Arab spring

 Zahha to Our Website: Palestine Victim of Arab Spring, We Reject Takfiri Trend

Local Editor

Palestinian Resistance Movement, Hamas official Mahmoud Zahhar stressed to al-Manar Website that the Palestinian cause was a victim of the so-called Arab spring, since the Arabs have put this issue aside as they were busy with their internal issues.

Mahmoud ZahharIn case you missed it:
[ 20/02/2011 

GAZA, (PIC)– Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahhar said that the US and Israel are both the biggest losers in the changes taking place in the Arab world as a result of the popular revolutions.

In an interview with our website for the occasion of the open media day for the support of Palestinian cause, Zahhar said that the term of ‘Arab spring’ is negative one since it caused disputes and chaos within the Arab countries.

Hamas official assured that Palestine should be distant from these conflicts that the Arab world has been witnessing, adding that Arabs should believe that this issue is the only and the central cause of our nation, despite the sectarian differences between the people of this nation.

In another context, Zahhar stressed that Hamas firmly stands with those who support resistance.

“It’s not important to be political allies. Anyone who stands against Israel and its occupation and support us we are with him.”

Meanwhile, Zahhar, one of Hamas founders voiced his movement’s rejection to the Takfiri trend, stressing that the only enemy is the Zionist one.

“Any person who belongs to any trend is the only one who is responsible for his actions. The main issue today is due to the Israeli occupation to our land. Then the priority is to liberate Palestine. People of the region must keep good relation with all sides in their countries and avoid any internal conflict,” Zahhar told our website.

Source: Al-Manar Website
29-11-2013 – 14:38 Last updated 29-11-2013 – 15:29

Concealment and Truth in Palestine and Beyond

By Gilad Atzmon

The following is the text of a talk I gave at the Seek, Speak and Spread Truth Conference in London last Saturday, 23 November, 2013.

History, we are told, is an attempt to narrate the past. But in reality, more than often history has little to do with revealing the past. It is instead an orchestrated and institutional attempt to shove the shame deep under the carpet.

Image

Much Jewish history texts, for instance, are there to divert the attention from the peculiar and tragic fact that along their history, Jews have managed to bring on themselves an endless chain of disasters. But Palestinian history at large,  is no different. After more than a century of liberation struggle, the situation in Palestine is worse than ever, yet Palestinian scholarship, as we will soon see, is drifting away from any possible understanding of the circumstances that led to their ongoing disaster.

Although the Brits have many war crimes attached to their names, the British Imperial War Museum decided to allocate a whole floor to the Jewish Holocaust instead of featuring one of the British-made genocides. The Brits, like everyone else, prefer to conceal their shame.

Historical accounts are commonly there to suppress the truth and conceal our shame. Yet, it is far from clear who is in charge, who decides what must be covered up and which path must be taken in order to suppress the truth.

Apparently, restricting the terminology and limiting freedom of expression by means of (political) correctness are probably amongst the most popular methods. Sadly enough, Palestine solidarity discourse is a spectacular test case in that regard. 

A brief examination of each of the terminological pillars and the principles that shape our vision of the conflict, of its history and of its possible solution are there to conceal the obvious causes, ideologies and belief system that drive the crimes in the Middle East in general and in Palestine in particular.

Zoom in

We’ll now scrutinize the terminology and notions that are involved in the debate over Palestine and expose once again the deceitful nature that is unfortunately intrinsic to the contemporary progressive discourse.

Zionism – Palestinian solidarity members are required to avoid the ‘J’ word and to use the word ‘Zionism’ instead. I recently revealed that Ali Abunimah, one of my current arch detractors, advised me a few years ago to refer to Zion when I really think Jewish so he and I “might find grounds for a lot of agreement….” In fact  Abunimah was not alone. Jewish Voice For Peace approached me with a pretty much similar offer about the same time.

The truth of the matter is that Israeli politics has little to do with Zionism. Israelis  are hardly familiar with Zionist ideology, nor they are concerned or motivated by Zionist praxis.  Zionism is largely a Jewish Diaspora discourse that vows to establish a Jewish National home in Palestine  and to civilize the Jew by means of nationalism. Israel is obviously the product of the Zionist project; however, the Israelis see themselves as post-revolutionary subjects – they transformed the Zionist dream into a practical reality.

Thus, criticism of Zionism per se hardly touches Israelis or Israeli politics. If anything, it actually diverts the attention from the crimes that are committed by the Jewish State in the name of the Jewish people.

But then, why do we use the term Zionism instead of referring to Jewish power, Jewish politics or the Jewish State?  Simple: we do not want to offend the ‘anti-Zionist’ Jews and Jews in general. We consciously choose to let Israel off the hook. Apparently we much prefer to target a phantasmic imaginary object that means very little rather than simply calling spade a spade.

Colonialism – Palestinian solidarity activists are expected to pepper their sentences with different permutations of the word ‘colonial’ with the hope that the more they use it the more it is likely to stick eventually. Consequently, activists and scholars commonly refer to Israel and Zionism as a ‘colonial project’. But they are obviously wrong.

Colonialism is traditionally defined as a clear material exchange between a ‘mother State’ and a ‘settler State’. Israel is no doubt a settler state, yet, no one can suggest who exactly was or is her mother.*

So why do we refer to Israel and Zionism as a colonial project? Simple: it saves us from admitting that the Jewish national project is indeed a unique project with no precedent in history. It would save us from admitting that we do not understand this project nor do we know where it aims. The Left and the so-called ‘anti-Zionist’ Jews cling to the colonial paradigm because it locates Israel and Zionism within a model they and their audience are slightly familiar with. The colonial paradigm suggests that the Jewish national project is as vicious as the British or French colonialism. But the grave truth is that we are dealing here with a unique form of abusive nationalist, racist project.

Settler Colonialism – in recent years a new terminological spin popped up within the Palestine solidarity ranks, namely ‘settler colonialism.’ I guess that my criticism of the colonial paradigm has shaken a few of the so-called progressive and ‘anti’ Zionists intellectuals, and they were pushed to revise their theoretical narrative. Their effort brought to the world a new deformed dysfunctional theoretical baby. But sadly enough, ‘settler colonialism’ also hardly explains a thing. It is rather a desperate attempt to further conceal the truth of the Jewish National project.

Settler Colonialism refers to the situation in which Super Power ‘A’ facilitates the settlement of Ethnic Group ‘B’ on Land ‘C’. Such an event may lead eventually to some grave consequences as far as indigenous population ‘D’ is concerned.

But here is the problem. This historical scenario A-B-C-D has nothing in common with Zionism, Israel or the Israeli Palestinian conflict. In reality, it was Zionists (B) who actually persuaded Britain, at the time a super power (A), that a Jewish Homeland in Palestine (C) is the right way forward. It was also Zionists (B) who promised to help pushing America into World War One that led Lord Balfour to commit the British empire (A) to the Zionist cause. In short, instead of the A-B-C-D chain of events, when it comes to Zionism, what we easily detect is a B-A-C-D chronology. It is the ethnic group ‘B’ that pushes Super Power ‘A’ to act in its favour.

But then we may want to ask ourselves why is it that Palestinian solidarity activists such as Ben White are consciously lying when they speaks about “settler-colonial past and present.”  Unfortunately White is not alone, the list of academics and scholars who participate in the dissemination of this false narrative is pretty impressive.

Why do they deceive, is it because they are an ignorant bunch? Not at all, they are actually dedicated scholars, it is just intellectual integrity that they lack, and severely.

Spreading the ‘settler colonialism’  narrative is, once again, intended to divert the attention from the embarrassing fact that already in 1917 the Jewish Lobby was amongst the strongest lobbies in the land. Such an admission could easily offend many Jews within the Palestine solidarity movement. Seemingly, we really do not want to offend anyone but intelligence.

Apartheid – Solidarity activists are inclined to refer to Israel as an apartheid state. They obviously let the Jewish State off the hook. Apartheid is commonly defined as a racially driven system of exploitation. But Israel is not Apartheid, it is not interested in exploitation. Israel is far worse, it wants the Palestinians gone. Israel is a racially driven, nationalist ethnic cleanser. In that regard, Israel is very similar to Nazi Germany. But this is exactly the equation we are supposed to avoid because it may hurt the Jews and even confuse the Left.

Two State / One State Debate – The philosophy behind the ‘one state solution’ is obviously ethical and universal.  But there is one slight problem. It finds no political partners or supporters within the Israeli society. Why? Because Israel is the Jewish State and the notion of Peace is totally foreign to Israeli and Jewish culture. The word ‘Shalom’ that is commonly translated as peace, reconciliation and harmony, is understood in Hebrew as ‘security for the Jews’.

Accordingly, it was very embarrassing to read Palestinian prominent intellectual Joseph Massad make some gross mistakes misinterpreting the word ‘peace’ in the context of the Zionist ideology and Israeli politics.

In a recent article named Peace Is War: Israeli settler-colonialism and the Palestinians Massad wrote:  “Waging war as peace is so central to Zionist and Israeli propaganda that Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which killed 20,000 civilians, was termed ‘Operation Peace for Galilee’”.

If Massad had committed to proper scholarship he would probably find out that, as far as Israelis are concerned, operation ‘Shlom Ha-Galil’ really meant ‘security’ for the Galilee rather than ‘Peace for Galilee’. Massad could have saved himself this intellectual blunder if he had read The Wandering Who rather than attempting to burn the book, whose author actually delves into the topic occasionally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlvaN2c-Oto

Israelis would support the One State Solution as long as it is One Jewish State. As Paul Larudee suggested recently, the Israelis would also support the Two State Solution as long as it is Two Jewish States.   Yet the only question that bugs me is, why would a Palestinian blogger such as Ali Abunimah  go out of his way to stop us from looking into the tribal and racist culture that drives the Jewish State?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hrJcMO88EI

Is it possible that some of the prominent Palestine voices also do not want to offend the Jews? I will let you judge.

Palestinian Cause

Is it really the Right of Return?  or 1948? For many years I was convinced that the Nakba was at the core of the Palestinian plight. But then monitoring BDS Movement (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction of Israeli goods, culture and academia) politics taught me that I could have been deluded.

When BDS was formed in 2005 this was its first goal:

1. Ending its (Israeli) occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall; (2005)

But then, without any attempt to discuss the matter publicly, BDS headquarters in Ramallah changed its first goal. It now reads:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands occupied in June 1967 and dismantling the Wall;

Some efforts have been made to make sure that Palestinian organisations are aware of this crucial change. Adding the 1967 made it clear that BDS de facto accepted the existence of a Jewish State over Palestine.

Interestingly enough, not many Palestinians were really outraged by BDS dropping the 1948 and accepting Israel as a fact. I guess that the meaning of it is simple. As far as Palestinians in exile in the West  are concerned, 1948 and  the Right of Return are not the real topic. I guess that such an agenda is not driven by the concern for the Palestinian refugees in Lebanon or Syria. I assume that refugees in Gaza and Jenin may also be outraged but, as things stand,  we can hardly hear their voices anyway. I guess that BDS is there to appease the ‘Jews in the movement’ and even liberal Zionists. This is hardly surprising considering the embarrassing fact that liberal Zionist George Soros who funds the Light Zionist J-Street also funds BDS as well as many other Palestinian NGOs.

Zoom Out

As we can see; Zionism, Colonialism, Settler-Colonialism, Apartheid, BDS and even The One State Solution are all misleading concepts and they are shaped to not offend the anti Zionist Jews and even Jews in general. This surreal and macabre political act explains why the solidarity movement has failed to deliver on every and each front, except one of course. With the support of liberal Zionists such as Soros, Palestine solidarity is now a little industrial affair that is pretty successful in maintaining itself. The absurd outcome is that the newly emerging Palestine solidarity industry actually benefits from the constant escalation of the crisis in Palestine – the worse is the situation on the ground, the more funding is pumped through the industry.

I guess that if we want to grasp what is behind this constant regression, concealment and repression are obviously the key words.

Concealment and repression lead towards stagnation. This is exactly what we see in Palestine and for more than a while – 100 years of struggle that led to a complete failure. Palestinian Solidarity is now farther than ever from understanding Zionism, Israel and the conflict. The so-called ‘movement’ is entrenched within a muddy terminological swamp that results in intellectual and spiritual paralysis.

This is exactly the point where truth and truth seeking come into play. The role of the intellectual and the artist is to unveil the concealed. To look into the pain and to dig into the essence. This search for essentiality is similar to the role of the psychoanalyst who delves into the realm of the unconscious.

When it comes to Palestine we have to grasp, once and for all, what the Jewish State stands for. We have to understand what Judaism and Jewishness are. We have to grasp who are the Jews, what unifies them and vice versa. We must learn the relationships between these distinct categories and Zionism and only then may we be ready to form some pragmatic and practical thoughts on Zionism, the Jewish State and its lobbies. By the time we are ready to do so, we may as well grasp the role of Jews-Only groups within the solidarity ‘movement’. We may comprehend how they have been shaping the discourse and suppressing the truth by dominating our language and restricting our intellectual liberties. By the time we are familiar with Jewish tribal culture ideology and politics, we may as well grasp the role of the ‘Sabbath Goy’, the caretaker who performs the services Jews prefer to leave to the Goyim.

But our role doesn’t end there. We also must grasp what Palestine means. How is it possible that Palestine scholarship is withdrawing rather than progressing. How is it possible that in the 70’s Palestinians were the world’s leading guerrilla fighters but not anymore. What happened and why?   What is it that the Palestinians want?  Can we even talk about Palestinians or are they a fragmented society that is split geographically, culturally, spiritually, politically and ideologically? And if they are divided, who is it that keeps them divided? Is there anything that can unite them?

I believe that the Jewish progressive politics together with the non-dialectic Left are to be blamed for this political disaster and terminological impotence. We are dealing with a concealment apparatus that forsakes the future just to sustain a remote echo of a decaying 19th ideology. It is there to nourish the forgetting of Being. It is there to make us aloof to the grave reality we are living in by means of intellectual and spiritual suppression.

When 1984’s Orwell wrote about Newspeak, he had Britain in mind. He foresaw the devastating impact of the so-called progressive minds around him. He could predict where The Guardians of correctness might be leading us all. And, for a reason, he made Immanuel Goldstein, the imaginary false dissent icon.

My message to you today is simple – true liberation is the ability to learn how to think, to learn how to be intrigued and irritated. Liberation is to unveil the concealed, to think and re-think, to view, re-view and revise.  To think is to aim at the essence, at the bottom of things, at the categorical. To think is to be able to distinguish between the symptoms and the disease.  Liberation is to burn bridges compulsively and enthusiastically and to bear the consequences. Liberation is to pursue truth relentlessly. This is exactly the moment when pain becomes pleasure.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics – available on Amazon.com  & Amazon.co.uk

*In his book Israeli Exceptionalism: The Destabilizing Logic of Zionism, probably the most important theoretical text on Israeli supremacy, Professor Shahid Alam manages to resolve this difficulty. He suggests that instead of a ‘mother State’, in the case of Zionism, we are actually dealing with a ‘surrogate mother.’ Yet, if Alam is correct, then the case of Israel and Zionism has no precedent in history. In other words, the colonial paradigm hardly teaches us a thing.

Saudi terror hurts British image: Cunningham



Tue Nov 26, 2013 7:4AM GMT

By Finian Cunningham


As Saudi-sponsored extremism in the Middle East becomes ever more reckless, it is rebounding with damaging public relations blowback for the kingdom’s Western backers.

A British parliamentary report last week noted that the London government has “a credibility problem” because of its long-standing political and commercial alliance with Saudi Arabia. 

This “credibility problem,” as the British lawmakers put it delicately, stems from Britain’s carefully contrived “democratic” image being tarnished because of its Saudi client. 

Typically, the British skirt around the issues, but the rest of the world is increasingly realizing that it is the Saudis who are funding and arming mercenary gangs that are slitting the throats of Christians and Muslims in Syria, and carrying out suicide bombings against innocent civilians, from Lebanon to Iraq to Pakistan. 

The study by the UK parliamentary foreign affairs committee acknowledged that the oil-rich kingdom has “a notorious human rights record.” And, risibly, it called for monitoring of Saudi-supplied weapons to militants in Syria and other extremists elsewhere.


However, a closer reading of the report shows that the British lawmakers are cynically less concerned by actual Saudi-sponsored extremism and violations, and more concerned by the damage it is causing to the international image of Britain from being associated with the Saudis. 

As the British parliamentary committee states: “Democratic governments such as the UK face a challenge in trying to reconcile their liberal constituencies at home with the need to maintain relationships with undemocratic and conservative regimes that are important to their interests on a regional and global level.”


In other words, the British government is squirming from “trying to reconcile” its bogus rhetoric on democracy and human rights while it is backing to the hilt the despotic dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. 

Officially, Britain claims that it is supporting “reforms” in Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf dictatorship in Bahrain. 

But this ever-so British conceit is being increasingly exposed as a barefaced lie as the House of Saud steps up its covert terror campaigns across the Middle East, including the regime’s merciless crackdown on pro-democracy movements in Bahrain and within Saudi Arabia itself. 

The British parliamentary report quaintly calls for the UK government “to assess” the supply of weapons from Saudi Arabia into Syria. This faux naiveté is contemptible and is fooling no one. It is already established fact that Saudi Arabia has been funding and arming extremist mercenary groups, such as the al-Qaeda outfit known as Al Nusra, with hundreds of millions of dollars. Indeed, these Wahhabi terror networks, which are killing dozens of civilians daily in Syria and Iraq, have been set up by senior figures in the House of Saud, including the kingdom’s intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. 

The deadly blast last week at the Iranian embassy in the Lebanese capital Beirut, killing more than 23, is credibly attributed to Saudi sponsorship. Several other bombings, rocket attacks and assassinations in Beirut and elsewhere in Lebanon over the past year are also suspected of being authored by Saudi intelligence. 

Saudi Arabia, as well as Israel, stands to gain from the wave of terrorism hitting the region, as that violence foments sectarianism and fragments popular democratic movements. The Saudi and Zionist regimes, based on despotism and divisiveness, have most to lose if peace and democracy were to flourish in the region. 

This terror agenda, which is also aimed at undermining Iran’s positive influence in the region, appears to have escalated in recent months as Washington and London have belatedly given their support to diplomacy over militarism towards Syria and Iran. 

This loose-cannon behavior by the Saudis is causing Britain much discomfort in particular. It is putting a very awkward spotlight on why Britain is so closely allied to such a despotic terror state. 

The answer to that increasingly apparent anomaly is simply the squalid detail of money. This is largely because of lucrative Saudi investment in Britain and the massive purchase of British-made weapons. Saudi investment in Britain is reckoned at $100 billion – the top European country destination for Saudi capital. 

Britain is also trying to finalize a strategic weapons deal with Saudi Arabia for 72 Typhoon fighter jets built by British Aerospace. The contract was first signed in 2007 and is worth $7 billion but its completion has been dogged by wrangling over costs. 

Moreover, the Saudi purchase is crucial for additional British sales of the Typhoon to Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates – worth another $7 billion. If the Saudi contract falls through that will most likely scupper the other Persian Gulf buyers. Given the clapped-out state of Britain’s industrial economy and the strategic importance of British Aerospace as one of the few remaining British-flagship manufacturing companies that would be a devastating blow. 

The recent announcement of thousands of job losses at BAE due to declining global sales underlines the high stakes. 

This all presents a painful conundrum for British rulers. Britain’s public image as a champion of democratic values is seen, by them, as an asset for doing business around the world. 

But this image is being seriously eroded, if not exposed as fraudulent, because of Britain’s association with the despotic terror state of Saudi Arabia. And Saudi rulers are straining this contradiction to breaking point by their increasing involvement in extremism and terrorism across the Middle East. 

That makes the trouble for Britain deeply problematic. The British cannot rein in the Saudis because of dependence on Saudi money. Any caution to the Saudis, even for cynical reasons of public relations, could jeopardize that money. No wonder British lawmakers are worried about “a credibility problem.” 

GILAD ATZMON ON PRESS TV: WORLD TIRED OF ISRAEL WAR POLICY ON IRAN

 

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2013 AT 10:23PM GILAD ATZMON

 

Political activist Gilad Atzmon says there is a growing international fatigue of Israel’s war-mongering policy and its effort to discredit a nuclear deal with Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he plans to send his national security advisor to the United States to discuss the interim deal with Iran on its nuclear program.

“Netanyahu and his cabinet are not yet used to the idea that there is a growing international fatigue of Israeli and Jewish lobby belligerence and war mongering,” Atzmon told Press TV on Tuesday.

He said that Israel and its powerful lobby in the United States “fail to understand that the world is telling them ‘enough is enough’.”

“We don’t want to fight anymore Jewish wars… we are not going to bomb Iran for you,” he added.

Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — the US, Britain, Russia, France and China — plus Germany, sealed an interim deal in Geneva on November 24.

Netanyahu responded angrily to the deal, calling it “a historic mistake.”

However, US President Barack Obama has defended the nuclear agreement with Iran, pushing back against rising criticism from Israel and Congress.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: