Washington & Riyadh: Sudan instead of Syria نقاط على الحروف – واشنطن والرياض: – السودان بدلاً من سورية؟

Washington & Riyadh: Sudan instead of Syria

مايو 19, 2017

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The relationship between Riyadh and Washington is developing after choosing Riyadh as the first destination of the visit of the US President to the region from the Saudi gate which hosts for the meeting of the US President a gathering of Washington’s allies in devotion to its position on one hand, and the guests’ loyalty to Washington on the other hand. The visit will include the occupied Palestinian territories and will be culminated with US-Palestinian-Israeli tripartite meeting that aims to launch the negotiating process; it will be coincided with indicators of calming the US rough rhetoric which biases to Israel, hoping to create the appropriate conditions which are desired by Washington for the negotiating choice. The most prominent here is the US announcement of an implicit postponement of the decision of transferring the US embassy to Jerusalem according to what the US President has already promised, and the talk that the matter is under consideration and it will be postponed for six months followed by another six months, and so on through linking with the negotiating course.

There will be a quiet negotiating path under the sponsorship of America for the Palestinian cause that relieves Saudi Arabia, and a US hostile rhetoric against Iran as the first engagement front in the region that meets the aspirations of Riyadh, in addition to US initiative to approach the situations of the region where Saudi Arabia seems the first involved in them, this initiative will affect the arrangements of the region’s files and will draw a plan to deal with its problems, alliances, battles, and the mechanisms of its management, the Saudi inner position especially the balances of the royal family has role in it as well as costs in its accounts in exchange of the Saudi malleability which will have a prominent role in the escalation front against Iran and in the Palestinian-Israeli negotiation file.

Syria and Libya files are of direct US interest in the war on ISIS, after the projects of changing the regimes have ended, and where the seeking to besiege Iran and Hezbollah is US interest as the war on ISIS. The Saudi role is predicative where the matter requires that, and where the regional roles in it are desired by America but not for Saudi Arabia. In exchange of its sticking to the Kurdish privacy in Syria, it wants to compensate Turkey by devoting its reference role devotion in the solution in Syria with the participation of Russia. In Libya where the most important title is the war on ISIS, the Saudi contribution serves the US visions, but the regional sponsorship of the war and settlements will be Egyptian with the partnership of Algeria when necessary. The facts provided by the situation in Syria and Libya show the weakness of the direct Saudi presence and the inability to offer anything other than money, whether to sabotage the settlements or to enhance the status of the forces which are joined by Washington for the settlement paths, both of them are directed by Washington but this does not justify any Saudi role.

In the Yemeni file, the international concern is focused on the catastrophic health situation and the urgent need to stop the war, in the light of the Saudi inability to make progress in the course of war militarily. The emergence of the Southern Movement as a direct party in the political process that suggests the separation from the north, and announces the transitional ruling council seems as an indicator that is added to the development of the media disagreements between the two partners of the war against Saudi Arabia; Ansar Alllah and the General People’s Congress to crystallize a political Yemeni quartet that consists of the government of Mansour Hadi, Ansar Allah, the General People’s Congress, and the Southern Movement . This seems a matter of US interest to discuss a federal constitutional formula that is similar to what the Americans want for Syria, in order to devote the security and the military Kurdish privacy. The Americans present the Yemeni pluralism as a source of change that relieves Saudi Arabia in a way that is different from the exclusive Saudi-Iranian bilateral, and as a source to alienate the Southern strategic areas as Bab Al Mandab and Aden away from the threats of the dominance of Al Houthis later on.

salman basheer.jpg555The Saudi exit without achieving Yemeni profits and without incurring losses is a US equation that coincides with a Saudi exit quietly from the Libyan and the Syrian files, this happens while the Americans decide to lift the sanctions on Sudan; the country which positioned politically and security under the Saudi auspices, and which has an African, demographical, and geographic importance, it locates off the Saudi coasts on the Red Sea, according to the US-Saudi relationships this will compensate Saudi Arabia after its exit from Syria, Libya, and Iraq to draw a new regional geography by transferring the Saudi leadership from the Arab and the Islamic wide range to the direct neighborhood, in a way that surpasses the traditional Gulf borders . In Yemen the endeavors to separate the Southern Movement and the General People’s Congress from Ansar Allah will increase in order to make them close to Saudi Arabia through promises and temptations, therefore the solution will be devotion for the important Saudi role in Yemen along with Sudan and Djibouti and perhaps tomorrow Somalia, a west range for the Saudi leadership versus in the East a financial, political and security distinctive situation in Pakistan, while the Arab east and west is left for the other balances. According to the US perspective the relationship with Iran in the East seems a partnership relation that is limited with the red line which is the security of Israel, while according to the Saudi vital range it seems from the taboos.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

(Visited 11 times, 1 visits today)

– واشنطن والرياض:

– السودان بدلاً من سورية؟

ناصر قنديل

– تتقدّم علاقة الرياض بواشنطن من اختيار جعل الرياض الوجهة الأولى لزيارة الرئيس الأميركي للمنطقة من البوابة السعودية التي تستضيف للقاء الرئيس الأميركي حشداً من حلفاء واشنطن تكريساً لمكانتها من جهة وللولاء الذي يقدّمه المدعوّون لواشنطن من جهة مقابلة. والزيارة التي ستشمل الأراضي الفلسطينية المحتلة وتتوّج بلقاء ثلاثي أميركي فلسطيني «إسرائيلي» بهدف إطلاق المسار التفاوضي، تترافق مع مؤشرات تبريد للخطاب الأميركي الفظّ في الانحياز لـ»إسرائيل» أملاً بتلطيف مناخ الرعاية الذي تريد واشنطن منحه للخيار التفاوضي. والأبرز هنا هو الإعلان الأميركي عن تأجيل ضمني لقرار نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس، وفقاً لما وعد به الرئيس الأميركي سابقاً، والقول إنّ الأمر لا يزال قيد الدرس، وسيؤجّل لستة شهور تتبعها ستة أخرى، وهكذا ربطاً بالمسار التفاوضي.

– مسار تفاوضي هادئ برعاية أميركية للقضية الفلسطينية يريح السعودية، وخطاب عدائي أميركي لإيران بصفتها جبهة الاشتباك الأولى في المنطقة يلبّي تطلّعات الرياض، وما بينهما سلة أميركية لمقاربة أوضاع المنطقة تبدو السعودية المعني الأول بها، تطال ترتيبات إدارة ملفات المنطقة ورسم خريطة التعامل مع مشكلاتها وتحالفاتها ومعاركها وآليات إدارتها، ويبدو للوضع السعودي الداخلي، خصوصاً توازنات العائلة المالكة دوره ضمنها وأثمان تسدّد في حساباته لقاء الطواعية السعودية، التي ستنال دوراً بارزاً في جبهة التصعيد على إيران، وفي ملف التفاوض الفلسطيني «الإسرائيلي».

– تحضر ملفات سورية وليبيا كمحاور اهتمام أميركي مباشر في الحرب على داعش، حيث مشاريع تغيير الأنظمة قد انتهى زمانها، وحيث السعي لمحاصرة إيران وحزب الله مسؤولية أميركية كما الحرب على داعش، والدور السعودي إسنادي، حيث يتطلّب الأمر ذلك، وحيث الأدوار الإقليمية فيهما تريدها واشنطن لغير السعودية، فمقابل تمسكها بالخصوصية الكردية في سورية تريد تعويض تركيا بمنحها تكريساً لدورها المرجعي في الحلّ في سورية بالتشارك مع روسيا، وفي ليبيا حيث العنوان الأهمّ هو الحرب على داعش، يحضر الإسهام السعودي حيث يخدم الرؤية الأميركية لكن الرعاية الإقليمية للحرب والتسويات ستكون مصرية بشراكة جزائرية حيث الضرورة. والوقائع التي يقدّمها الوضع في سورية وليبيا يظهر هزال الحضور السعودي المباشر والعجز عن تقديم شيء آخر غير المال، سواء لتخريب التسويات، أو لتعزيز وضع قوى تضمّها واشنطن لمسارت التسوية، وكليهما يُدار عبر واشنطن ولا يبرّر للسعودية دوراً.

– في الملف اليمني يتصدّر الاهتمام الدولي الحديث عن الوضع الصحي الكارثي والحاجة الماسة لوقف الحرب، في ظلّ عجز سعودي عن تحقيق تقدّم في مسار الحرب عسكرياً. ويبدو ظهور الحراك الجنوبي كطرف مباشر في العملية السياسية يطرح الانفصال عن الشمال، ويعلن مجلس حكم انتقالياً، مؤشراً يضاف لتطور الخلافات الإعلامية بين شريكي الحرب بوجه السعودية أنصار الله والمؤتمر الشعبي، ليتبلور رباعي يمني سياسي قوامه، حكومة منصور هادي وأنصار الله والمؤتمر الشعبي والحراك الجنوبي، ويبدو ذلك موضع ترحيب أميركي لبحث صيغة دستورية فدرالية تشبه ما يرغبه الأميركيون لسورية لتكريس الخصوصية الكردية العسكرية والأمنية، ويقدّم الأميركيون التعدّد اليمني كمصدر تحوّل يريح السعودية في تظهير التسوية بمكان مختلف عن ثنائية حصرية سعودية إيرانية، ويأخذ المناطق الاستراتيجية الجنوبية كباب المندب وعدن خارج مخاطر سيطرة الحوثيين لاحقاً.

– الخروج السعودي بعدم تحقيق أرباح يمنية مقابل عدم تكبّد خسائر، معادلة أميركية تتزامن مع خروج سعودي هادئ من الملفين الليبي والسوري، يحدث بينما يقرّر الأميركيون رفع العقوبات salman basheer.jpg555عن السودان، الدولة التي تموضعت سياسياً وأمنياً تحت العباءة السعودية، والتي تشكل ثقلاً أفريقياً وسكانياً وجغرافياً وتقع قبالة السواحل السعودية على البحر الأحمر. وسيشكل في العلاقات الأميركية السعودية التعويض الذي ستحصل عليه السعودية عن خروجها من سورية وليبيا بعد خروجها من العراق، لترتسم الجغرافيا الإقليمية الجديدة، بنقل الزعامة السعودية من المجال العربي والإسلامي الواسع إلى الجوار المباشر، ولكن بما يتخطى الحدود الخليجية التقليدية. ففي اليمن ستتزايد مساعي استقطاب الحراك الجنوبي والمؤتمر الشعبي لفصلهما عن أنصار الله، وتقريبهما من السعودية بوعود وإغراءات، ليصير الحلّ تكريساً لدور سعودي وازن في اليمن ومعه السودان ومعهما جيبوتي وربما غداً الصومال، جناح غربي للزعامة السعودية يقابله شرقاً وضع مميّز مالي وسياسي وأمني في باكستان، ويترك المشرق والمغرب العربيان لحسابات وأرصدة أخرى، حيث تبدو العلاقة بإيران في المشرق من الزاوية الأميركية علاقة شراكة يحدّها خط أحمر هو أمن «إسرائيل»، بينما في المدى الحيوي السعودي تبدو من المحرّمات.

(Visited 194 times, 194 visits today)
Related Articles

وثيقة حماس..سامَحَ اللهُ حزب الله

الأربعاء 03 أيار , 2017 01:40

 

إيهاب زكي – بيروت برس – 

في ظل الانقسام الفلسطيني، أصبح انتقاد أحد طرفّي الانقسام، يضعك تلقائياً في خانة الطرف الآخر، دون أيّ اعتبارٍ لأصل القضية أو حقائق التاريخ وثوابت الواقع، ودون حتى اعتبار لمجرد فلسطينيتك اللامؤطرة وعروبتك اللامتحزبة، وبما أن وثيقة حماس قد صدرت وأصبحت حقيقة لا تسريبات، وبما أنها قابلة للنقد كقابليتها للنقض كأيّ عملٍ بشري، ودرءًا لشبهة تسخير النقد في معمعة الانقسام الفلسطيني، وبالتالي إفراغه من مضمونه ومحتواه بحجة تحامل الطرف الآخر وتصيده الأخطاء، فقد قررت الانتماء إلى حركة حماس على طول الفترة الزمنية لكتابة هذه الأسطر، لكنه انتماءٌ مشروطٌ بعدم البيعة على السمع والطاعة في المنشط والمكره،  لذلك فمبدئياً لن أطلب من حماس الاعتذار إلى فتح كما فعل أحد الناطقين باسم حركة فتح، رغم أن من يقارن وثيقة حماس ببرنامج النقاط العشر عام 1974، يدرك أن المطالبة بالاعتذار أمراً وجيهاً، ولكني سأقر إقرارَ كامل الأهلية بكل ما جاء في الوثيقة، مع بعض الاستثناءات التي قد تنسف الإقرار بالوثيقة، مع كامل الأهلية أيضاً.

بالرجوع إلى برنامج النقاط العشر عام 1974، نجد أنه أكثر تفوقاً من وثيقة حماس الجديدة شكلاً ومضموناً، فمثلاً وعلى سبيل الدعابة، فقد اعتبر البرنامج أن الكفاح المسلح على رأس الوسائل النضالية المشروعة لتحرير فلسطين، فيما اعتبرت حماس المقاومة في قلب الوسائل، والرأس متفوقٌ على القلب، كما ورفض البرنامج القرار 242، كما رفض أي مشروع كيان فلسطيني يكون ثمنه الاعتراف بالعدو والصلح والحدود الآمنة،  لكنه من جهةٍ أخرى دس فكرة تجزئة القضية من خلال تجزئة الأرض، تحت بند إقامة سلطة وطنية مقاتلة على أي جزءٍ يتم تحريره، فيما حماس كانت أقل غموضاً وأقل حنكةً حين حددت أراضي 67، وللمفارقة فإن برنامج النقاط العشر يقوم بتكليف السلطة الوطنية –الناشئة عن تحرير الجزء-بالعمل من أجل توحيد أقطار المواجهة في سبيل تحرير كامل التراب الفلسطيني، أي إزالة “إسرائيل”، فيما وثيقة حماس تقبل بدولة 67  مع الإشارة إلى إمكانية التهدئة في إطار إدارة الصراع، وهذه المقارنة ليس من باب أفضلية طرحٍ على آخر، فكلا الأمرين كانا مقدماتٍ لما هو أدهى وأمَّر، ولكن للرد على من يحاجج بقوة البنود في وثيقة حماس ومبدأيتها، متغافلاً عن التفريط المقصود فيها.

قد يكون انطباعاً شخصياً وليس يدخل باب التحليل السياسي، لكن رئيس المكتب السياسي حركة حماس خالد مشعل، كان وهو يقدم للوثيقة باديَّ الإرباك والتلجلج، فهو كمن يريد أن يلقي على مسامع قومه قولاً ثقيلا، وناور كثيراً قبل البدء بتلاوة المقصود حصراً من الوثيقة، وهو القبول بدولة في حدود الرابع من حزيران عام 67، دون الاعتراف بـ”دولة إسرائيل”، خصوصاً وهو يبرر لها بأنها ليست من صنيعته منفرداً، بل هي موقف حركته أدناها وأعلاها، كما أنها بتوافق جناحيها العسكري والسياسي، وهي ليست وليدة اللحظة بل أربع سنوات من النقاش والمشاورات، وهذه الأربع سنوات بالذات للخلف تعني عام خروج حماس من سوريا، وكتبت حينها بأن هذا الاصطفاف الحمساوي إخوانياً، يأتي في إطار مغريات تركية قطرية لمشروع إخواني شامل برعاية أمريكية، لاستبدال سلطة وطنية”علمانية” بسلطة وطنية”إسلامية” إخوانية، وفي كلتا الحالتين ليست سلطة مقاتلة، ففي الوقت الذي ترفض فيه حماس اتفاقية أوسلو وما ترتب عليها، تردف في بندٍ لاحق أن السلطة يجب أن تكون في خدمة الشعب، وهذه السلطة إحدى مترتبات أوسلو، وقد خصت حماس رفضها لمترتبات أوسلو بالتنسيق الأمني، في الوقت الذي اعتبر فيه مشعل أن التفاوض مع العدو ليس حراماً، وقد نستنبط من هذا أن حماس قابلة للتفاوض مستقبلاً لكن دون الاضطرار لتنسيق أمني.

واستطراداً وعلى عجالةٍ أود أن يكون من المهم الاستخفاف بمقايسة تفاوض النبي مع مشركي قريش، التي يستخدمها الإسلاميون لتبرير كل تفريطٍ أو تنازل، كما قال مشعل في تقديمه للوثيقة أيضاً، فالقياس خاطئٌ  في أصله، ومن حيث يدرون أو لا يدرون، فإن هذا القياس يعني لو أن النبي كان بيننا اليوم، لما تردد في التفاوض مع “إسرائيل”، ولأبرم معهم “عهود” أوسلو أو وادي عربة أو كامب ديفيد، فهل يقبل الإسلاميون وضع النبي في مكانة من وقّعوا تلك المعاهدات، أم أنهم سيعتبرون أنه بحكم نبوته وما يتنزل عليه من وحي سيأتي بشروطٍ أفضل، وكخلاصةٍ ووصولاً للعنوان والحقيقة، قد تكون ظروف التسعينات قابلة لاستنباط تبريرات التنازلات، — -رغم أن التنازل لا مبرر له سوى الرغبة فيه-، حين أقدمت عليها منظمة التحرير، حيث انهيار المعسكر الشرقي وتدمير العراق وهيمنة أمريكية مطلقة وموازين قوى مختلة وذهاب عربي بالإجماع إلى مدريد، ولكن اليوم ونحن نشهد صعود محور المقاومة وإعادة بعض التوازن لميزان القوى العالمي، لا يمكن لحماس أن تبرر وثيقتها بحجة النضج السياسي وتراكم التجربة، وأنها لا تعيش في جزيرة فتسعى لإعادة توضيح قضيتها للعالم بشكلٍ مقبول، إنما الحقيقة أن هذه الوثيقة هي ضريبة اصطفاف حمساوي صريح في محور تركي قطري وسعودي أيضاً و”المعتدل” عموماً، ولكن تجربة حزب الله العسكرية ومواقفه المبدأية السري منها والمعلن، وكذلك الصمود السوري سيجعلان من وثيقة حماس ومواقفها المستجدة، مجرد سلحفاة لكعة ومتعثرة، لأن سقف هذا الصمود وهذه المواقف مرتفعٌ جداً، بشكلٍ يجعل من السير في طريق التفريط أمراً متعسراً لا سلساً، بعكس لو سقطت سوريا وانتزع سلاح الحزب، لكان التنازل أكثر يسراً، وهذا الاستنتاج يقودنا إلى تساؤلٍ أخطر، وهو هل ستضطر حماس تحت ضغط محورها وضغط الرغبة بوراثة السلطة في الضفة، لاتخاذ مواقف سلبية علنية من الحزب، لذلك سامح الله حزب الله على هذا السقف المرتفع.

Haniya Elected New Head of Hamas – Islamic Jihad Rejects Palestine State within 1967 Borders

Ismail Haniya Elected New Head of Hamas

May 6, 2017

Hamas said its former chief in Gaza, Ismail Haniya, was elected overall head of the Palestinian resistance group on Saturday, succeeding Khaled Meshaal.

Haniya is expected to remain in the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian enclave run by Hamas since 2007, unlike Meshaal who lives in exile in Doha and has completed the maximum two terms in office.

“The Hamas Shura Council on Saturday elected Ismail Haniya as head of the movement’s political bureau,” the group’s official website announced.

He beat contenders Moussa Abu Marzuk and Mohamed Nazzal in a videoconference vote of the ruling council’s members in Gaza, the West Bank and outside the Palestinian territories.

On Monday, Hamas unveiled a new policy document, announcing it accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and Gaza, the territories occupied by the Zionist entity in the Six-Day War of 1967.

It also says its struggle is not against Jews because of their religion but against the Zionist entity as an occupier.

The original 1988 charter will not be dropped, just supplemented, the movement said.

Hamas officials said the revised document in no way amounts to recognition of the Zionist entity as a state.

Source: AFP

Islamic Jihad Rejects Palestine State within 1967 Borders

May 6, 2017

Islamic Jihad's deputy leader, Ziad al-Nakhala

Palestinian resistance group Islamic Jihad reiterated its stance on a Palestinian state limited to the 1967 borders.

The announcement comes few days after other Palestinian resistance movement, Hamas unveiled a new policy document, announcing it accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, east Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and Gaza, the territories occupied by the Zionist entity in the Six-Day War of 1967.

Islamic Jihad’s deputy leader, Ziad al-Nakhala said his movement rejects what he described as Hamas’s new policy of easing its stand on the Zionist entity.

“As partners with our Hamas brothers in the struggle for liberation, we feel concern over the document” which the main Islamist movement that rules Gaza adopted on Monday, said Islamic Jihad’s deputy leader, Ziad al-Nakhala.

“We are opposed to Hamas’s acceptance of a state within the 1967 borders and we think this is a concession which damages our aims,” he said on Islamic Jihad’s website.

Nakhala said the new Hamas policy formally accepting the idea of a state in the territories occupied by the Zionist entity in the 1967 Six-Day War would “lead to deadlock and can only produce half-solutions”.

Related Articles

 

COLLABORATOR LINDA SARSOUR’S FUNDRAISER FOR “DAMAGED” JEWISH GRAVES IS A PUBLICITY STUNT IN SERVICE OF WORLD ZIONISM

by Jonathan Azaziah

Linda Sarsour is the trash that just keeps on sinking, ain’t she? This vile, ultra-collaborationist, boot-licking House Muslim, fresh off “protesting” with every degenerate known to man at the Soros-funded #WomensMarch, is back in the news after she organized a fundraiser and procured $100,000.00+ in the name of repairing damaged Jewish graves in Missouri. Where to even BEGIN with this slimy creature and her latest slimeball activity?

The most logical starting point perhaps is that Sarsour The Sanhedrin Slave’s move represents an upholding of Muslim “Goyhood”–that is, the Jewish narrative that Muslims cannot be considered human, or decent, or part of the greater fabric of the US “melting pot” unless they are subservient to Judaic discourses, fawning over Jews, acting like Jews and going out of their way to please Jews. Linda L’Chaim is what her name should be as she is saying “cheers” to Jewish supremacy whilst cloaking it in salaams and a hijab. Yet again, she’s plastered throughout liberal media where praise is heaped upon her by Jews across the spectrum for her promotion of (fake) Muslim-Jewish solidarity.

We all know that if she raised money for a defaced mosque, a burnt-down church or, GOD FORBID, children in Yemen orphaned and disabled by the Zionist-aligned Saudi regime–which, for the record, she adores and whitewashes–the establishment would either not give a rat’s ass or find a way to slander her. But in this age of an Israelified America specifically and a Judaized West more generally, kissing the Jew-ring of the Jew-kings is a surefire way to skyrocket one’s person to social and political stardom.

Which brings us to the next point of pertinence: If this wasn’t a matter of socio-political opportunism and/or Linda Lilith getting marching orders from one of her controllers, what the hell would be the point ANYWAY when police don’t even know who did it? It still hasn’t been designated a “hate crime” after a week of investigation and if we’re keeping it 100% honest here, even if a “White Supremacist” or a “Muslim extremist” turns out to be the patsy, the most likely culprit for wrecking the headstones is the Jews themselves! Every single time the MSM hysterically screeches about a swastika or some other fake expression of “Jew-hatred” being scripted on a synagogue or in a dorm room, a Jewish community center or on Jewish graves, a Jew turns to be responsible.

It just happened recently at Northwestern. Why do the Yahoudlings do this? Easy! To keep the fraudulent notion of “anti-Semitism” alive and well so other minorities–Gentile minorities, that is–think of Jews as “one of their own” instead of the privileged, wealthy, globe-holding oppressor-class that they actually are.

Next question:

Why in the name of God is a Palestinian woman, and an ostensible “activist” and “liberation advocate” at that, raising money for a Zionist institution? Yes, the Chesed Shel Semeth Society is both Orthodox Jewish (read: the most supremacist of the supremacists) and Zionist. The group, which also operates the Beth Shalom Cemetery, was founded by Russian Zionist Jews and has served as the historic link between the St. Louis Orthodox Jewish community and the Jewish usurpers in Palestine since 1888. For decades, it funded Zionist Hebrew schools in both Poland and Russia. It also has operational ties to the Jewish Federation of St. Louis, one of the most powerful Zionist organizations in the Midwest and the group responsible for sending St. Louis Blue Bacon (cops) to the cancerous Zionist regime for “riot” training.

Considering these facts, Sarsour The Succubus and her partner in this hideous escapade Tarek El-Messidi weren’t raising money for “their Jewish brothers and sisters” but an organ which represents the Halakhic-Talmudic terrorist cancer occupying Palestine. I’d ask how she likes THOSE apples, but knowing what we do about this putrid woman, she probably won’t care and will happily bob for more if that’s what Soros orders.

And finally: Why did ANYONE have to raise money for these Zionist pigs ANYWAY, Muslim or otherwise? Don’t they have the damn dough themselves? Obviously, they do. Just look at the top two personalities on the board of the Jewish Federation of St. Louis – Harvey N. Wallace (Board Chair), the owner of the second-biggest accounting firm in all of St. Louis, and the extraordinarily demonic Kenneth Kranzberg, an American Jewish Committee patron and the the Chairman of Kranson Industries, (dba TricorBraun), one of the biggest packaging suppliers in all of Amreeka. Couldn’t one of these “philanthropic” Jewish gents paid to renovate the rather minuscule damage to Chesed Shel Semeth’s headstones? Of course they could’ve. It is, for lack of a more eloquent phrase, piss-on money to them. So why didn’t they? Because then they couldn’t milk the story for all that it’s worth and keep Jews in the news to the detriment of “Goyim” everywhere. Keeping this in mind, it should be more than evident that Linda Bint Shlomo’s fundraiser is indeed nothing more than a publicity stunt to reinforce Jewish hegemony and colonize Muslims even further.

To close:

While we wish it didn’t have to be said, thanks to the likes of Linda Sarsour, it most definitely and emphatically does – Muslims do not have to give one iota of a damn about anything that befalls Jews in America (or anywhere in the world for matter), let alone lick Jewish boots, just so we can be considered “upstanding citizens” in this hyper-capitalist, hedonistic, materialistic, consumerist society which is diametrically opposed to everything good and righteous we hold somewhat dear. We simply don’t. For we are the ones oppressed here; the ones aggressed against; the ones threatened and in danger always.

It is in fact the Jews who should be proving ***their*** humanity to ***us*** since they are the ones who fuel Islamophobia, degrade society with pornography, lobby for the wars that destroy our homelands with direct invasions and indirect terrorist destabilizations, stage false flags, brainwash our children with their Hollywood filth, do everything in their power to illegally uphold the disease in Palestine called “Israel” and so on. Jews are the 1% of the 1%. The shadow government behind the shadow government. The puppetmaster pulling the strings of the puppetmaster. And the vice-regents of Dajjal. We don’t owe them a bleeding thing except our resistance to their criminal, hegemonic, Kabbalistic system.

As for Sarsour, she is the gleeful agent of this system–the Sanhedrin’s Slave, as mentioned above; the Mishpucka’s Menial; the Vilna Gaon’s Vassal. And it is beyond telling that with all the horrors facing the Ummah today because of Organized Jewry and the illegitimate, virus-like ‘Israeli’ regime, from the Takfiri terrorist assaults on Syria and Iraq, to the genocidal destruction of Yemen by Al-Saud, to the occupations of Palestine and Kashmir, to the renewed aggression against Iran, Linda The Liar thought her time was best spent raising money for superficially damaged Jewish graves instead of any of the aforementioned states. She’s operating outside the fold of Islam. No clue why she even bothers keeping up the facade anymore. When she disregards the suffering of her brothers and sisters in faith for those who are responsible for their suffering, she’s totally exposed.

She might as well just convert to Judaism. And truth be told, with her services rendered to the Kehilla in her tirades of hasbara against Syria and Yemen, her defense of the murderous Saudi regime, her commitment to the existence of ‘Israel’, her censorship of all discussion on Palestine at the #WomensMarch and now THIS… She’s practically a member of “The Tribe” already.

Inner and Outer Ugliness: Congress Proves Once Again it is Occupied Territory

cspan1

By Richard Edmondson

In the photo above we see US Congressman Ed Royce of California discussing HR 11, a resolution he introduced condemning the UN Security Council for its recent action on Israeli settlements. You’ll also notice, to Royce’s right, Florida  Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen brushing her hair with a pink hairbrush.

The scene is from a debate in Congress which took place on January 5, 2017. Royce and a number of other congressional representatives (342 of them in all) became hot and bothered over the UN’s pointing out (correctly of course) that the settlements are illegal. The photo is a screen shot I took from a C-Span video.  It’s a long video, more than eight hours, but if you advance it to about the 5:19:52 mark, you can watch the entire House debate on HR 11, which not surprisingly includes a lot of groveling to Israel (hat tip to Greg Bacon).

Just to refresh your memory, the Security Council, by a vote of 14-0 with 1 abstention, passed a resolution on December 23 “condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967.” Voting in favor were Russia, China, Malaysia, Venezuela, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Uruguay, France, Angola, Egypt, Japan, UK, Ukraine; the lone abstention was by the US.

The Security Council action was welcomed by a good many people the world over, although Benjamin Netanyahu threw a temper tantrum, claiming to have “absolute” proof the Obama administration had been secretly behind it. Other critics accused the US of a “betrayal” of its longtime “ally,” and an enormous amount of controversy erupted over the issue in the waning days of 2016 and carrying over into the new year.

Of course, anytime a dispute emerges between the US and Israel, members of Congress can always be counted upon to side with the latter rather than with their own nation–and this time was no exception.

“Today we put Congress on record objecting to the recent UN Security Council resolution that hurt our ally, that hurt Israel, and I believe that puts an enduring peace further out of reach,” fretted Royce.

Let me call once again your attention to the image of Ros-Lehtinen brushing her hair, for throughout a good portion of Royce’s speech, the Florida congresswoman–apparently unaware she was on camera–seemed preoccupied with primping and applying makeup to herself, this presumably in an effort to make herself look “beautiful.”

In the first frame of the montage below we see her with the pink hairbrush, followed by a shot of her rummaging in her purse. In the third frame she pulls out what appears to be lipstick or eyeliner (I’m not an expert on women’s makeup), and lastly applying it with her right hand while still holding the container with her left hand.

makeupsession

In the following three frames we see a now cosmetically-adorned Ros-Lehtinen giving her speech before Congress and the C-Span cameras:

l1

l2

l3

“Our closest friend and ally, the democratic, Jewish state of Israel, has been under constant attack by the United Nations,” she claimed.

The Security Council resolution that occasioned Ros-Lehtinen’s diatribe specifically is entitled UNSC Resolution 2334. I put up a post about it on December 24 that contains its full text. The measure expresses “grave concern” that settlements, including those in East Jerusalem, are “dangerously imperiling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines.” It also:

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

For Ros-Lehtinen, however, UNSC Resolution 2334 was nothing more than an execrable attempt to “delegitimize” Israel–and all the more reason why swift passage by Congress of HR 11 was needed to repudiate it!

This resolution, Mr. speaker, will not undo the damage that has been done at the Security Council, but it sends an important  message to the world that the United States Congress resoundingly, and in a strong bipartisan manner, disapproves of the vote taken on resolution 2334, and it sends a warning to the nations that will gather in Paris next week to discuss the peace process that there will be repercussions if there is a move to introduce a parameters resolution before the 20th and in an effort to further isolate Israel. Our closest friend and ally, the democratic, Jewish state of Israel,  has been under constant attack by the United Nations. Abu Mazen and the Palestinians have pushed a campaign to delegitimize the Jewish state, to undermine the peace process, to achieve unilateral statehood recognition.

For some reason–I’m not quite sure why–the sight of Ros-Lehtinen primping and then fulminating at the podium brought to mind a picture I once saw of an economically-impoverished elderly woman kissing a bird.

beauty

I first came across this image several years ago in a poem posted by Nahida the exiled Palestinian, whose website, Poetry for Palestine, can be found here. Her poem is entitled “Beauty.”  It is not a lengthy poem at all. In fact, it contains a mere five very short, but very powerful, lines:

Sometimes, beauty is mistakenly understood;
Assuming that
If someone is beautiful, they are always good,
When truth is
When someone is good, they are always beautiful.

The woman whose picture accompanies the poem is beautiful in a way that Ros-Lehtinen is not. In addition to berating the Security Council, the Florida congresswoman also attacked the UN Human Rights Council.

“We’ve seen it at  the Human Rights Council where Israel is constantly demonized  and falsely accused of human rights violations while the real abusers of human rights go unpunished because that body has utterly failed to uphold its mandate,” she insisted. “This is a body that allows the worst abusers of human rights–like Cuba, Venezuela, and China–to actually sit in judgement of human rights worldwide. What a pathetic joke!”

It’s interesting that Ros-Lehtinen would single out Cuba, Venezuela, and China as being among “the worst abusers of human rights,” while saying nothing–zip–zero–about Saudi Arabia, a country that executes people by beheading and which currently holds the chair of the Human Rights Council.

 photo syrianchildren.jpg“Yet the only thing they can agree on is to attack Israel,” the congresswoman blubbered on, “the only democracy in the Middle East and the only place in the region where human rights are protected.”

Exceptions were taken to other UN deliberative bodies  as well.

“We’ve seen this scheme to delegtimize Israel at the General Assembly where in its closing legislative session, the General Assembly passed twenty–twenty–anti-Israel resolutions and only four combined for the entire world!” Ros-Lehtinen bellowed.

“These institutions have no credibility, and now we have the unfortunate circumstance of the White House deciding to abstain from this anti-Israel, one-sided resolution at the Security Council,” she added. “Our ally was abandoned, and credibility and momentum were given to the Palestinians’ schemes to delegitimize the Jewish state, to undermine the peace process, and while the damage has been done, Mr. Speaker, by this act of cowardice at the Security Council, we will have an opportunity to reverse that damage.”

What exactly she meant by “we will have an opportunity to reverse that damage” is unclear. Possibly the Trump administration has some plan to introduce a new measure at the UN. In any event, Ros-Lehtinen clearly seems to be a person of both inner and outer ugliness–though of course she is not the only member of Congress with such attributes. Perhaps the most groveling speech of all those given in Congress on January 5 was that delivered by House Speaker Paul Ryan.

“The cornerstone of our special relationship with Israel has always been right here in Congress, this institution,” said Ryan. “The heart of our democracy has stood by the Jewish state through thick and thin. We were there for her when rockets rained down on Tel Aviv; we were there for her by passing historic legislation to combat the boycott divestment and sanctions movement; and we’ve been there for her by ensuring Israel has the tools to defend herself against those who seek her destruction.”

“I am stunned! I am stunned!” the House speaker continued, “at what happened last month! This government, our government, abandoned our ally Israel when she needed us the most! Do not be fooled. This UN Security Council resolution was not about settlements, and it certainly was not about peace. It was about one thing and one thing only. Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish democratic state. These types of one-sided efforts are designed to isolate and delegitimize Israel. They do not advance peace, they make it more elusive.”

If Ryan was the supreme groveler in the debate, Royce would probably have to rank a close second. One thing which seemed terribly to incense the California congressman about the Security Council resolution is that it doesn’t recognize Israel’s right to steal East Jerusalem.

“This dangerous resolution effectively states that the Jewish quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and the Western Wall, Judaism’s holiest site, are in the words of the resolution ‘occupied territory.’ Why would we not veto that?” asked Royce.

“It also lends legitimacy to efforts by the Palestinian authority to put pressure on Israel through the UN rather than to go through the process of engaging in direct negotiations, and it puts wind in the sails of the shameful Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement,” he added.

gzmrg4Royce also claimed that Israel, not Occupied Palestine, is suffering “bullying and harassment.” That may sound like the statement of someone living in a parallel universe, but it is a view shared by New York Congressman Eliot Engel, one of HR 11’s original cosponsors.

“Throughout its entire history the state of Israel has never gotten a fair shake from the United Nations,” insisted Engel. “Year after year after year member states manipulate the UN to bully our ally Israel, to pile on one-sided resolutions placing all the blame for the ongoing conflict on Israel.”

Even those representatives who spoke in opposition to HR 11, did so while expressing their support for Israel at the same time. One such member was Rep. David Price, a Democrat from North Carolina.

“The fact is, H Res 11 runs a real risk of undermining the US Congress as a proactive force working toward a two-state solution,” Price lamented. ” And in this period of great geopolitical turmoil and uncertainty, we must reaffirm those fundamental aspects of our foreign policy, including our strong and unwavering support for Israel, while also demonstrating to the world that we are committed to a diplomacy that defends human rights and promotes Israeli and Palestinian states  that live side-by-side in peace and security, a formulation that has characterized our country’s diplomacy for decades.”

Another who voted against HR 11 was Jan Schakowsky, a Democrat from Illinois who is also married to Robert Creamer, the Democrat Party operative who was seen in a Project Veritas video discussing plans to have protestors show up at Trump rallies during the campaign. Schakowsky feels that a little bit of criticism of Israel is allowable at times, and furthermore she holds to this belief as a “proud Jew,” as she stated to her colleagues.

 photo thousandeyes_zps2c4c47c1.jpg“I stand here as a proud Jew and someone who throughout my entire life has been an advocate for the state of Israel, and I am standing here to oppose our H Res 11,” said the Illinois congresswoman. “And as a member of congress I have been committed to maintaining America’s unwavering support for Israel, which has lasted from the very first moments of  Israel’s existence. The US-Israel bond is unbreakable, despite the fact that the United States administrations have not always agreed with the particular policies of an Israeli government.”

Yes, to be sure, our own government and Israel’s have not always seen eye-to-eye, but funny how that never seems to stop the billions in US tax dollars flowing into the Jewish state’s coffers each year. Schakowsky went on:

Presidents from Lyndon Johnson to George W. Bush have each vetoed, and sometimes voted for, a UN resolution contrary to the wishes of Israel’s government at the time, and only the Obama administration, until two weeks ago, never, ever cast a vote against what Israel wanted. But opposition to the building of settlements on land belonging to Palestinians before the 1967 war was, with the exception of the land, of course, that’s going to be swapped, agreed to by both parties, has been the official US policy for many decades, contrary, again, to the assertions of H Res 11.  It has also been the policy of the United States to recognize that the only long term solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, the violence, the loss of life, is to create two states, one for the Palestinians and one for Israel.

 photo statehood2.jpg

Exactly how a contiguous Palestinian state is going to be created in a West Bank splotched and dotted with all those settlements, is something Schakowsky left unaddressed. But having voiced a few mild criticisms of Israel, the congresswoman apparently felt an overwhelming need for balance–and so she tossed out a few criticisms of the Palestinians for good measure.

“A two-state solution is the only way Israel can continue as both a democratic and a Jewish state living in peace and security that has eluded her from the very beginning,” she said. “The building of settlements is an obstacle to achieving that goal–and of course settlements aren’t the only obstacle to Israeli-Palestinian peace. The US resolution reiterates the Palestinian Authority security forces must continue to counter terrorism and condemn all of the provocations.”

 photo terrorreigns2.jpg

Provocations? It’s an interesting word when referring to a people who have been resisting land theft and occupation for more years than most of us have been alive. It also gives rise to a question: How is it possible to carry out “provocations” against a country or governmental entity that technically speaking is in all likelihood guilty of the crime of genocide? Of course it’s unlikely you’ll get an honest answer to that question from Schakowsky or any other member of Congress.

At any rate, HR 11–a resolution which not only impugns the Security Council but even criticizes the United States–passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 342-80, with 4 abstentions. You can go here to see  the roll call on the vote.

It was Jeffrey Blankfort who first coined the old saying about Washington being Israel’s “most important occupied territory.” I think it was sometime back in the late eighties or the nineties when Jeffrey made that comment, and if anything, over the years, it has become more profoundly true than ever.

Syrian opposition says Palestinians are ‘living in paradise’

 

The Ugly Truth

syria-israel

‘Israel’s help is vital,’ says representative of Free Syrian Army in rare meeting with Israelis; Zionist Union MK insists ‘Assad must go’

Times of Israel

A rare public meeting between Israelis and Syrians in Jerusalem on Tuesday was interrupted by Palestinian protesters who expressed outrage that Syrians would work with Israelis. The protesters met with a furious response from the Syrians, who accused them of failing to understand what true oppression involves.

“You are living in a paradise compared to Syria,” Issam Zeitoun, a liaison for the Free Syrian Army with the international community, told the protesters as they refused to stop shouting and allow the event to continue. “You should be ashamed.”

The altercation occurred at a packed hall at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, where a Free Syrian Army liaison and a Syrian Kurdish representative spoke to students at an event organized by the university’s Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace.

“I wasn’t surprised by what happened. I expect that people will behave like this when I speak at an Israeli institution because it is really a serious matter,” Zeitoun told The Times of Israel afterwards.

“Many Syrians and Palestinians see us as traitors,” he said. “I don’t think anyone can judge Syrians for speaking with Israelis in public.

“The intensity of the conflict, and the number of the people we have lost, is too great, and I will personally do all that I can and speak with everyone, not just in Israel, but around the world, in order to change the situation,” he added.

After the protests had died down, Zeitoun told the crowd that Israeli aid to Syrians, which includes Israel’s well-known medical assistance — more than 2,000 Syrians have been treated in Israeli hospitals since 2013 — is not enough to influence the population to be more pro-Israel. He said there needed to be some action on the political level for the majority of Syrians to be swayed in its attitude to the Jewish state.

Zeitoun, who has become a familiar Syrian opposition representative in the Israeli press, argued that Israel should help create a safe zone in southern Syria, where he is from.

Zeitoun told The Times of Israel he did not believe Israel should intervene militarily, but should make itself felt politically in the Syrian conflict.

“Israel should play a role in getting the political cover from the Russians and the Americans [for a safe zone], and we’ll do the rest,” he said.

He argued that a safe zone could be created on Syria’s border with Israel, and would mark the start of a return to normalcy in the country, where civilian infrastructures such as schools and hospitals, not to mention civil society institutions, have been decimated by six years of bloody war.

The Syrian war has claimed over 400,000 lives, according to UN estimates, and driven millions from their homes.

The discussion was led by Zionist Union MK Ksenia Svetlova, a former journalist who covered the Arab world in Israeli and Russian media, a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and the current chair of the Knesset’s caucus for Israeli-Kurdish relations. Syrian Kurdish author and journalist Sirwan Kajjo, who hails from the Syrian border town of Qamishili but now lives in Washington, DC, was also on the panel.

According to Svetlova, Israeli cabinet ministers, when they meet on Syria, often ask, “Who is there on the other side that we can talk to and prepare for the next stage?”

She noted that the Lebanese terror group Hezbollah, which is committed to destroying Israel, has grown stronger after six years of fighting in Syria.

“In 2017 we will see the increasing influence of Hezbollah. We will have to make hard choices in regard to action or inaction in Syria,” she said.

Speaking to The Times of Israel after the event, Svetlova criticized those who argue it would be better to allow Syrian strongman Bashar Assad to retake control of the country and bring the war to an end. That would inevitably lead to another rebellion, she contended.

“Every forceful control of a population will end up in rebellion. When they say we need to bring Assad back from the grave, they forget that the slaughter, and the chaos that erupted after, was his doing. To bring back the dictatorship is never the answer,” she said.

Asked if she would accept Assad’s return alongside political reforms, she responded, “If he was going to bring political reforms, he would have introduced them already.”

“Bringing him back will be much worse. It will strengthen [Islamic State] and [its affiliate] the al-Nusra Front because they will have more relevance,” she said.

Related Videos

 

فتاة فلسطينية لسوريين “معارضين” في القدس: أنتم عملاء

Related Articles

Palestinian Colonel Arrested over Criticizing Abbas Presence at Peres Funeral


Palestinian Authority Chief Mahmpud Abbas shakes Israeli PM Banjamin Netanyahu's hand at Shimon Peres' funeral in al-Quds

Palestinian Authority sacked on Friday Colonel Ossama Mansour over a message he wrote to criticize the PA president, Mahmoud Abbas, for offering condolences for the death of former president of Zionist entity Shimon Peres.

According to Palestinian newspapers, Ramallah government arrested Mansour – one day after sacking him – over the same reason, without providing any justification for that. PA agencies sabotaged the Colonel’s house after his arrest.

Before his arrest, Mansour said he accepts the PA’s decision to be fired although he didn’t insult Abbas. However, his arrest sparked a wave of Palestinian activists who demanded the authority to release him.

“We have been rolled with reactions and everyone roared back when it was announced you were heading to console over Shimon Peres .. the founder of settlements whom you are calling to stop .. in addition to his practices after Oslo accord and his statements and participation in the continuous Palestinian suffering. In any case, whether he is a terrorist or not .. whether he is the founder of Ccracking Bones theory during the first intifada or not .. whether he has to do with the massacre at the Jenin refugee camp and the massacre of Jasmine neighborhood in Nablus or not .. whether he has to do with the massacre at Qana [in Lebanon] or not .. whom does he represents so that he made you to head to participate in his funeral whereas most of your people refuse,” Mansour wrote in his letter.

“You can pass by the mother of martyr Yasser Hamdouni and ask her permission. If she agrees, you can go. If she doesn’t agree, you have to make up your decision then. If you decided to participate by yourself in the funeral of the killer of our sons, you would be mistaken. And if you decided so after consultation, you would be misled. There must not be personal or friendly relations with the occupier as long as he continues the policy of arrogance against our people,” Colonel Mansour added.

Source: Al-Manar Website

———————————

Increasing dissatisfaction in Palestine with the quisling Mahmoud Abbas

Palestinians have been circulating and signing a document of dissociation form Mahmoud Abbas.  It is amazing that in all the fawning coverage of Peres in US media, none really covered the depth of anger and contempt of him by Arabs (young and old).

It says: “O, ugly face.  I attest to God that I detest you.  You have broken our backs, and hijacked our victory, and aided our enemy, and turned our friends against us, and blackmailed our people, and starved our folks, and besieged our lands.  You have dropped our cause, and accepted humiliating  and permitted debacles.  You betrayed Gaza, and prevented dignity.  Your grey hair is a shame, and your face is fire, and your goodness is lowly, and your evil is revenge.  The tongues of adults, and children have cursed you, o jack ass”.  (It all rhymes in Arabic except the jackass bit at the end).

Even the “Youth of Fath” at Beir Zeit are protesting this humiliating participation.

Related Videos



 




 Related Articles
%d bloggers like this: