Stages of pre-American recognition of settlement مراحل ما قبل التسليم الأميركي بالتسوية

Stages of pre-American recognition of settlement

Written by Nasser Kandil,

يوليو 25, 2017

It was not in the consideration of the axis of the resistance especially Iran, Hezbollah, and Syria to be engaged in a war that justifies the entry of Hezbollah and the Iranian forces to Syria, because they are mobilizing for the war of liberating Palestine, to discuss the settlements such as what about the presence of Hezbollah and Iran near the borders of Palestine with Syria. The goal of their participation was to protect Syria from the war of overthrowing, fragmentation and chaos, as well as to repel the danger of the rootedness of the terrorism in order to protect their presence and their project. The ceiling of their project is the recovery of Syria, its rise, recapturing what was grasped of its geography, the unification of its national territory, and the reactivation the role of its institutions under the leadership of its president, constants, and its resisting choice.

Russia. Iran, Syria, and the resistance have agreed since the beginnings that the long costly war is the way for the settlement of the recovery of Syria unified under the leadership of its president and its army. If the settlement ensures this title then it will mean the victory and the reduction of its costs. Therefore, the task of the fighting is to provide an issue to politics that allows seeing if the war team led by Washington is ready for a settlement under this title. So what is needed is first, the American must reach to the stage of recognition of the futility of betting on the war to achieve the goal of overthrowing Syria, this has been achieved with the Russian positioning in Syria in the end of 2015 and it was dedicated with the battle of Aleppo in the end of 2016, second the American must recognize that the cost of attrition is bigger than the cost of settlements.

In the war of attrition, the American has tested the assumptions of chaos and the hegemony of ISIS, towards the assumption of division, he preferred them all to the settlement entitled the return of Syria under the leadership of its president and army, but the alternative choice for the settlement becomes the continuation of fighting under the title of the war on ISIS. The Russian equation was presented to the American in way that expresses that if you are afraid from the positioning of Hezbollah and the Iranians in all the Syrian geography, then where the Syrian army fights, it will be accompanied with the Iranians and Hezbollah, and where they enter no one can take them out, so it is the time to think of handling over the territories in which you have the decision to the Syrian army where it can enter alone, so the choice between Syria with its president and its army or Syria with its president and its army along with Iran and Hezbollah on all the new geography since everything passed has become out of debate.

The fall of the US red line on the Syrian-Iraqi borders was the most important shift, the consultations that preceded the meeting of the Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin throughout three weeks regarding Astana path and the issues of the south, and on the other hand the meetings to discuss the proposed issues to coordinate between the two delegations of experts and the advisors before the summit have succeeded in reaching the equation which proves that the cost of the settlement has become less than going on in the war of attrition, but the cost of promoting the settlements has to be reasonable. So the choice was American in the southern of Syria to link it with the concerns of Israel and to serve its security, and the possibility of the American boast by alienating Iran away from the borders, and the choice was Ukrainian to link lifting the sanctions with the understanding signed in Minsk to end the dispute.

Neither new Korean missiles, nor US aircraft will violate the airspaces which are close to Russia, no for the overthrow of Qatar and no for the change of the equations of the global gas market versus no for the fall of Kiev system, but slow accumulation of settlements. In Syria the staying of the Syrian President is the key of the solution under the title of ensuring a strong central country that is able to have control on its borders. So Turkey will be relieved and Israel will keep silent. Geneva will start as a framework for the political solution with the start of the battles of ISIS in Deir Al Zour under the coordination of the Kurds with the Syrian army and the partnership of the Russians and the Americans, where the Kurdish presence in Geneva will be the start of getting rid of the federal dividing entity versus a representative presence of the opposition delegation that commensurate with the military presence.

The axis of the resistance put its plan as Iran put its plan for its nuclear program; the recognition of the accomplishment by the Western side is half of the victory as in Syria. The west will get mature when the alternative of the settlement becomes the capability of Iran to possess the bomb which it does not want, and so in Syria when the settlement becomes Syria with its president and army an alternative to what is like the nuclear bomb, which means the reach of Hezbollah and Iran the lines of contact with Israel. As the nuclear bomb that is not a goal for neither Syria, nor Iran, nor Hezbollah. but when the American who has come to the war to overthrow Syria, its president and its army is seeing in his staying now a repelling against  a bigger danger which the axis of the resistance succeeded in making its attainable danger then this is the peak of strength, sophistication, and the strategic intelligence exactly as Barack Obama who has described the reason of accepting the nuclear understanding with Iran and lifting the sanctions by saying; we have imposed the sanctions in order to make Iran far from having a bomb, but today the sanctions have become the way for the possession of Iran of its bomb.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,

(Visited 4 times, 4 visits today)

مراحل ما قبل التسليم الأميركي بالتسوية

ناصر قنديل

– لم يكن في حساب محور المقاومة، خصوصاً إيران وحزب الله وسورية فتح حرب تبرر دخول حزب الله والقوات الإيرانية إلى سورية، لأنهم يحشدون لحرب تحرير فلسطين كي يصير نقاش التسويات من باب ماذا عن وجود حزب الله وإيران قرب حدود فلسطين مع سورية؟ فالهدف من المشاركة التي نهضت لها قوى المقاومة كان حماية سورية من حرب الإسقاط والتفتيت والفوضى، ولصدّ خطر تجذّر الإرهاب حماية لوجودها ومشروعها. وسقف المشروع تعافي سورية وقيامة دولتها واستردادها ما انتزع من جغرافيتها، وتوحيد ترابها الوطني، وإعادة دور مؤسساتها، لكن برئيسها وثوابتها وخيارها المقاوم، وكله مختزَنٌ بمعادلة سورية بجيشها ورئيسها.

– تفاهمت روسيا وإيران وسورية والمقاومة منذ البدايات أن الحرب المكلفة والطويلة هي طريق لتسوية تثبت الخلاصة بعودة سورية موحّدة برئيسها وجيشها. فالتسوية إذا ضمنت هذا العنوان تعني تشريع النصر واختصار أكلافه. ولذلك فمهمة القتال تقديم مادة للسياسة تسمح بقياس درجة نضج رأس فريق الحرب الذي تمثله واشنطن لتسوية بهذا العنوان، وأول المطلوب أن يبلغ الأميركي مرحلة التسليم بلا جدوى المزيد من الرهان على الحرب لتحقيق هدف إسقاط سورية، وهذا تحقق مع التموضع الروسي في سورية نهاية عام 2015 وتكرّس مع معركة حلب نهاية عام 2016، وصارت المرحلة الثانية أن يسلّم الأميركي بأن كلفة الاستنزاف أكبر من كلفة التسويات.

– في حرب الاستنزاف اختبر الأميركي فرضيات الفوضى وهيمنة داعش وصولاً لفرضية التقسيم وفضلها جميعاً على تسوية عنوانها عودة سورية برئيسها وجيشها، لكنها تبخّرت جميعها، وصار الخيار البديل للتسوية هو مواصلة القتال تحت عنوان الحرب على داعش وتكون تركة داعش الرئيسية من نصيب الجيش السوري وحلفائه وخصوصاً حزب الله. وبالتالي قدمت المعادلة الروسية للأميركي بصيغة تقول، إذا كنتم تخشون تموضع حزب الله والإيرانيين في كل الجغرافيا السورية، فحيث يدخل الجيش السوري بالقتال سيدخل معه الإيرانيون حزب الله، وحيث يدخلون لا يمكن لأحد إخراجهم، إنه الوقت لتفكروا بالتسليم الطوعي للمناطق التي تستطيعون الإمساك بقرارها لحساب الجيش السوري فيدخلها وحيداً، والخيار بين سورية برئيسها وجيشها، او سورية برئيسها وجيشها ومعهما إيران وحزب الله على كل الجغرافيا الجديدة للحرب، باعتبار ما مضى قد مضى وصار خارج البحث.

– سقوط الخط الأحمر الأميركي على الحدود السورية العراقية كان النقلة الأهم للتحوّل، والمشاروات التي سبقت لقاء الرئيسين دونالد ترامب وفلاديمير بوتين خلال ثلاثة أسابيع على مساري أستانة من جهة وترتيبات الجنوب، ومن جهة مقابلة لقاءات بحث الملفات المطروحة للتنسيق بين وفدَيْ الخبراء والمستشارين قبيل القمة، قد نجحت ببلوغ المعادلة التي تقول إن كلفة التسوية صارت أقلّ من كلفة المضي بحرب الاستنزاف، وبقي أن تكون كلفة التسويق للتسويات معقولة، فكان الخيار جنوب سورية لربطه أميركياً بهواجس «إسرائيل» وخدمة أمنها، وإمكانية التباهي الأميركي بإبعاد إيران عن الحدود، وكان الخيار أوكرانيا لربط رفع العقوبات بالسير بالتفاهم الموقّع في مينسك لإنهاء النزاع.

– لا صواريخ كورية جديدة ولا طائرات أميركية تخرق الأجواء القريبة من روسيا، ولا سقوط لقطر وتغيير في معادلات سوق الغاز العالمية مقابل لا سقوط لنظام كييف، وذهاب بارد لمراكمة التسوياتز وفي سورية بقاء الرئيس السوري مفتاح الحل تحت شعار ضمان دولة مركزية قوية قادرة على الإمساك بحدودها، فترتاح تركيا وتسكت «إسرائيل»، ويبدأ جنيف كإطار للحل السياسي عندما تبدأ معارك داعش في دير الزور بتنسيق الأكراد مع الجيش السوري وشراكة الروس والأميركيين، ويكون الحضور الكردي في جنيف بداية النزول عن شجرة الكيان الفدرالي والتقسيمي، مقابل حجم تمثيلي في وفد المعارضة يتناسب مع الحجم العسكري.

– وضع محور المقاومة خطّته، كما وضعت إيران خطتها لملفها النووي. فالاعتراف بالإنجاز من الجانب الغربي وشرعنته نصف النصر. وكذلك في سورية، وينضج الغرب لما يصير بديل التسوية بلوغ إيران القدرة على امتلاك القنبلة التي لا تريدها. وهكذا في سورية، لما تصير التسوية بعنوان سورية برئيسها وجيشها بديلاً عما يشبه القنبلة النووية، أي بلوغ حزب الله وإيران بالقوة خطوط التماس مع «إسرائيل». وهذا كما القنبلة النووية ليس هدفاً لسورية ولا لإيران ولا لحزب الله من القتال في سورية، أن يصير الأميركي الذي جاء للحرب لإسقاط سورية برئيسها وجيشها قد صار يرى ببقائهما وعودة اعترافه بهما رداً لخطر أكبر نجح محور المقاومة بجعله خطراً ممكن الحدوث. تلك قمة القوة والحنكة والذكاء الاستراتيجي، تماماً كما وصف باراك أوباما سبب قبول التفاهم النووي مع إيران ووقف العقوبات بالقول، لقد فرضنا العقوبات لنجعل إيران أبعد عن امتلاك القنبلة. واليوم صارت العقوبات الطريق لبلوغ إيران امتلاك القنبلة.

(Visited 2٬102 times, 2٬102 visits today)
 Related Videos

Related Articles

Hezbollah Flags Waved, «Israeli» Flags Burnt at London Embassy Protest

Hezbollah Flags Waved, «Israeli» Flags Burnt at London Embassy Protest

Local Editor

Scores of demonstrators vented their anger at new security measures at the al-Aqsa Mosque in al-Quds [Jerusalem]. Hezbollah flags were waved and “Israeli” flags were burned outside the “Israeli” entity’s London embassy over the weekend.

"Israeli" flag being burned in a UK protest

The Kensington protest on Saturday was organized by a group called Palestinian Forum in Britain to counter “‘Israeli’ aggression in Jerusalem [al-Quds]” after the apartheid “Israeli” regime introduced metal detectors following the killing of two policemen on 14 July.

Videos of the London protest, posted online by both Palestinian and “Israeli” supporters, show a group of young men seizing an “Israeli” flag, running away down the street with it, and later setting fire to it with a blowtorch.

Press Attaché Yiftah Curiel tweeted that the protesters were “sick” and “thugs” for “cheering on the bloodshed”.

Saturday’s event was one of a series of flare-ups around the world, with protests in Turkey, Jordon, Malaysia and Lebanon, as Muslim communities reacted to the apartheid entity’s new measures at one of Islam’s holiest sites.

In the Irish city of Derry, residents held a silent protest for Palestinians in Gaza, in which they lit a candle and shared a message of solidarity for Gaza’s population, who last month had their electricity supplies cut further.

israel | palestine | united kingdom | aqsa

Source: News Agencies, Edited by website team

25-07-2017 | 13:33

Palestine news

On The Current International Zionist Smear Campaign

July 24, 2017  /  Gilad Atzmon

A Statement by Gilad Atzmon

“The criminalisation of political speech and activism against Israel has become one of the gravest threats to free speech in the west.” Glenn Greenwald 19.7.2017

Together with veteran Pink Floyd star Roger Waters and many other artists and thinkers worldwide, I am being subjected to an international smear campaign, orchestrated and promoted by various Zionist institutions that attempt to silence every form of legitimate dissent of Zionism and Israeli politics.

Video:  https://youtu.be/kaWRu0nvEr8

Local councils, clubs and festivals that promote my music or my thoughts around the world are being subjected to a barrage of emails sent in a clear and malicious attempt to slander me. In these emails I am called an ‘anti-Semite’, ‘bigot’, ‘racist’, ‘Holocaust denier’, and so on.

Obviously, there is no truth in any of this.  As a writer I have indeed criticised Israel and other manifestations of Jewish political exceptionalism, I critically analysed Zionism, Jewish politics, ideology and identity politics in general. I do believe that all states, ideologies and politics must be subject to criticism, but I have never criticized Jews (or anyone else for that matter) as people, as a race or as a biological entity. In fact, my work is deeply anti-racist and focuses only on the political and the cultural.

Unfortunately, there are some who are engaged in relentless censorship and book burning and we must never permit them to succeed. Intellectual freedom and tolerance are precious Western values which we must defend at all odds. So in case you feel the need to address some of those hateful operatives, here are a few points you might wish to take into account.

1.    From its day of inception, my own musical group, the Orient House Ensemble (OHE) has been a melting pot for artists of many different ethnicities and backgrounds, including Jewish, Black, Arab and Romani musicians – hardly a ‘bigoted’ setting.

2.    Despite increasingly tough ‘hate speech’ laws in the UK, Europe and the USA, I have never once been questioned by any law enforcement authority about any of my writings or public appearances. My views and thoughts are well within the strict boundaries of the law in the UK, EU and every other Western country.

3.    I have been accused of being a ‘Holocaust denier.’ This is clearly not the case. I do not deny the Holocaust, but I do insist that this chapter in our past should be treated not as a religion or dogma, but must, like all other events in the past, be subject to scrutiny and open discussion.  Despite Germany and Austria’s stringent Holocaust denial laws, my books and writing are translated and published in both countries and I perform and teach there regularly without ever being subjected to any legal issues.

4.    My work has been endorsed by some of the most respected humanists and scholars around. Here are just a few examples:
“A transformative story told with unflinching integrity that all (especially Jews) who care about real peace, as well as their own identity, should not only read, but reflect upon and discuss widely.” Professor Richard Falk United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Palestine

“Fascinating and provocative” Professor of Political Science, John J. Mearsheimer

“Atzmon has the courage – so profoundly lacking among Western intellectuals” Professor of Sociology, James Petras

“Gilad’s book constitutes an excellent critique of Identity Politics in general and Jewish Identity Politics in particular from a humanistic perspective.” Professor of International Law, Francis A. Boyle

Instead of King of the Jews. Perhaps Atzmon should be recognized as the prophet of old, At least in his self description and his outreach, this is the way he appears” Jewish theology Professor Marc Ellis

“A superb and necessary book that demystifies some “undeniable truths” about Jewish identity –
Gauden Sarasola, El Pais

“Atzmon’s essential contribution to solidarity with Palestine is to help non-Jews realize that they are not always in the wrong when conflicts with Jewish organizations arise.” Science Professor Jean Bricmont

“Gilad Atzmon’s book, The Wandering Who? is as witty and thought provoking as its title.  But it is also an important book, presenting conclusions about Jews, Jewishness and Judaism which some will find shocking but which are essential to an understanding of Jewish identity politics and the role they play on the world stage.” Publisher and Film Producer Karl Sabbagh

“Gilad’s escape from spiritual claustrophobia towards a free and open humanitarianism is fearless” Legendary Musician Robert Wyatt

“It is excellent from beginning to end.  very well-organized and well-articulated arguments.” Revolutionary Songwriter David Rovics

“In his inimitable deadpan style, Atzmon identifies the abscess in the Jewish wisdom tooth – exilic tribalism – and pulls it out. Ouch!” Eric Walberg, Al Aharam Weekly

“A brilliant analysis that makes what appear to be contradictions in Jewish identity based political behavior not only comprehensible but predictable.” Jeff Blankfort, Jewish Solidarity Campaigner

“A fascinating achievement” Law professor Oren Ben Dor,

“Gilad Atzmon is someone who encompasses what it means to be an intellectual.” Kim Petersen, Dissident Voice

Gilad Atzmon’s book Being In Time: A Post Political Manifesto is available now on: Amazon.co.ukAmazon.com and gilad.co.uk.   

These are the israeli leaders who want to destroy al-Aqsa

These are the Israeli leaders who want to destroy al-Aqsa

 

Temple Institute head Yisrael Ariel, who has called for the destruction of churches and mosques and the mass slaughter of those who refuse to accept his extreme version of Judaism, at the al-Aqsa mosque compound in June. (via Facebook)

Since the gun battle at the al-Aqsa compound on 14 July that ended in the deaths of three Palestinian citizens of Israel and two Israeli police, Israeli media have largely focused on outrage that anyone would carry out an attack at a holy site, while praising Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s collective punishment against the Palestinian population.

“They are the strife mongers,” Yedioth Ahronot columnist Ben-Dror Yemini wrote. “They are harming the justified struggle for equality. They are spreading lies and nurturing incitement. For our sake, for their sake, Israel’s Arabs should also get rid of this nuisance.”

“Netanyahu and [PA leader Mahmoud] Abbas both acted responsibly to prevent a holy war; but the Arab world’s condemnation of Israel is a reason for concern,” read the subheading of an analysis by Haaretz’s Barak Ravid.

Missing from commentaries across the board has been any acknowledgment of the role played by fanatical settlers intent on wresting control of the al-Aqsa compound in occupied East Jerusalem and eventually destroying it as part of an apocalyptic vision.

The compound, known to Muslims as Haram al-Sharif and to Jews as Temple Mount, includes the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock. It is one of the holiest shrines for Muslims all over the world, as well as a touchstone of Palestinian identity.

Game changer”

Temple movement leader Yehuda Glick, right, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. (via Facebook)

Israelis who seek to take over al-Aqsa see the 14 July attack and subsequent violence as an opportunity to advance this agenda. Immediately after the incident, the Temple movement’s official body released a statement calling to expel Palestinians from the compound: “We must liberate the Temple Mount from the murderous Islam and return it to the people of Israel.”

“Looking forward to building the Temple this year and hope that you will soon see the face of our righteous Messiah,” Baruch Marzel one of the most extreme leaders among Israel’s West Bank settlers, wrote last week in an open letter to the mufti of Jerusalem – the top Muslim official in the city.

Bezalel Smotrich, a Jewish Home party lawmaker, does not want to wait that long. “I would set up a synagogue on the Temple Mount today, this morning,” he said on Monday.

Under Israeli military protection, these settlers and extremists tour the grounds on a daily basis, hoping to provoke violent reactions from Palestinian worshippers by shouting and singing nationalistic anthems.

This then provides occupation forces with the necessary pretext to enact harsh measures, with the eventual goal of cleansing non-Jews and replacing the Muslim holy sites there with a Jewish temple, thus triggering a civilizational clash with Islam.

Yehuda Glick, a longtime leader of the Temple movement, now a Likud Party lawmaker, last week welcomed Israel’s ban on Muslims entering the al-Aqsa compound in the days following the shootings.

“This is an enormous game changer,” he said. “Everything is part of the redemption process but the things that happen on the Temple Mount are especially so.”

“Radical Muslims who desecrate with blood the holiness of the Temple Mount, the holiest place to the Jewish people, have no right to be there,” Glick and the Jewish Home party’s Shuli Moalem-Refaeli said.

Last week, Glick held a Temple movement emergency session in the Knesset building, Israel’s parliament. Attendees included genocide advocate Rabbi Yisrael Ariel and Bentzi Gopstein, leader of the anti-miscegenation youth movement Lehava.

Genocidal ideology

Yisrael Ariel, the chief rabbi of the Temple movement, articulated an apocalyptic end times scenario in 2015.

“[God] is the one who commanded us to go from city to city conquering them, and to impose the seven laws [of the Sons of Noah] throughout the world,” Ariel said.

Ariel added that if Muslims and Christians “raise the flag of [surrender] and say, ‘From now on, there is no more Christianity and no more Islam,’ and the mosques and Christian spires come down,” then they would be allowed to live. “If not,” he warned, “you kill all of their males by sword. You leave only the women.”

“We will conquer Iraq, Turkey [and] we will get to Iran too,” Ariel proclaimed.

Ariel is the founder and head of the Temple Institute, the government-funded group that has published detailed blueprints and a computer animation of what the Temple, to be built over the ruins of al-Aqsa, will look like.

The Temple Institute has received funding from Israel’s education ministry to develop a curriculum to instill “longing for the Temple” in children as young as those attending kindergarten. In 2013, Israel’s mayor of Jerusalem, Nir Barkat, presented Ariel with an award for his organization’s work.

This genocidal ideology is rooted in religious Zionism and its political wing is represented by the Jewish Home party.

In 2012, Zevulun Orlev, one of the party’s lawmakers in the Knesset, called for the construction of a temple at the compound, saying that removing the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosque would mean that the “billion-strong Muslim world would surely launch a world war.”

This messianic extremism has taken hold in the Likud Party of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well.

In 2014, Likud’s Moshe Feiglin, then deputy speaker of the Knesset, explained the fanatical worldview. “We are in the major front of the fight for the free world against the evil forces of the most extreme Islam,” Feiglin asserted. “Behind the violence, there is a spiritual battle, and the core of that battle is that place – the Temple Mount.”

Pretext of “religious freedom”

Many other Israeli politicians are following the Temple movement’s lead.

A Likud Party website has launched a petition to “raise the Israeli flag on the Temple Mount.”

“The Temple Mount is not in our hands,” the petition declares. “We must change this absurdity.”

Transport minister Yisrael Katz has vowed that Israel “will not cede sovereignty” over al-Aqsa.

“We need to close the Temple Mount to Muslims for an extended period of time,” Jewish Home lawmaker Moti Yogev said.

Incitement from Israeli officials has become commonplace in recent years. Dozens of Knesset members have given verbal, and even material, support to the Temple movement.

While their statements occasionally elicit a headline, they are rarely taken into consideration in analysis of the explosive situation at the al-Aqsa compound.

This incitement is often couched in calls for Israel to unilaterally change the status quo and allow Jewish prayer at al-Aqsa, citing a lack of religious freedom at the occupied holy site.

But Israel’s official chief rabbis have long formally prohibited prayer by Jews at the compound for theological reasons – out of concern that Jews could inadvertently desecrate places that must remain ritually pure.

In keeping with this tradition, leaders in Israel’s Orthodox Jewish community blame those who insist on going to the al-Aqsa compound for the resulting bloodshed. The prohibition on visiting the Temple Mount is firmly upheld by leading Orthodox rabbis.

“Those who visit the Temple Mount are turning the Israeli-Arab conflict into a religious conflict,” the Eidah Chareidis, a major anti-Zionist Orthodox Jewish organization in Jerusalem, has warned.

“The true story”

However, as Feiglin revealed at a Knesset session in 2013, the call for Jews to be allowed to pray at the compound is a pretext for an Israeli seizure of the site.

“Let’s be truthful. The struggle here in not about prayer,” Feiglin admitted. “Arabs don’t mind that Jews pray to God. Why should they care? We all believe in God. The struggle is about sovereignty. That’s the true story here. The story is about one thing only: sovereignty.”

To make the job of journalists covering events at the al-Aqsa compound easier, I have compiled below this article a list of current and former Knesset members and ministers who have supported the Temple movement’s apocalyptic goals in varying degrees.

Some of the Israeli politicians identify with the movement themselves, while others understand it is politically expedient to make public statements in support of Israeli sovereignty at al-Aqsa.

Likud lawmaker Avi Dichter, for example, is a former head of Israel’s Shin Bet secret police. Dichter appeared in the 2012 documentary The Gatekeepers, which marketed him and five other former Shin Bet chiefs as tough but pragmatic security types who have become “doves.”

Israeli lawmaker and former Shin Bet head Avi Dichter posted this photo of himself at the al-Aqsa compound with a call to open it to Jewish prayer. (via Facebook)

 

But last week, Dichter posted on Facebook a photo of himself in front of the Dome of the Rock with text reading, “Open the Temple Mount for Jews.”

Provocation and bloodshed

Given the level of incitement regarding the most sensitive site in the country – on top of the climate of desperation created by Israel’s deadly siege of Gaza, expanding colonies in the occupied West Bank including Jerusalem and the erosion of rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel – attacks like the one on 14 July should come as no surprise to informed observers.

As Dichter said in 2013 when he was public security minister – before embracing the Temple movement’s agenda – Jewish prayer at al-Aqsa, “will serve as a provocation, resulting in disorder, with a near certain likelihood of subsequent bloodshed.”

That may be precisely what many Israelis hope for. Following a stabbing attack by a Palestinian on Friday that left three Israelis in the illegal settlement of Halamish dead, Tzachi Hanegbi, a senior Likud minister and close ally of Netanyahu, threatened Palestinians with a “third Nakba” – a reference to Israel’s mass expulsions and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948 and 1967.

Another former public security minister, Hanegbi promised back in 2003 that Jews “soon, very soon” would be able to pray at the al-Aqsa compound.

Israeli leaders and politicians who support the Temple movement

Eli Ben-Dahan

Deputy defense minister Eli Ben-Dahan of Jewish Home personally donated $12,000 to the Temple Institute, which spearheads efforts to replace the Muslim holy sites with a Jewish temple.

“We have to call upon the government and Knesset to permit Jewish prayer, to make Jewish prayer something normal and permitted,” Ben-Dahan told a conference in the Knesset last November.

Ben-Dahan has previously described Palestinians as “beasts” who “aren’t human.”

Tzipi Hotovely

In a recent speech to supporters of the Temple movement, deputy foreign minister Tzipi Hotovely of Likud called on Jews to go to the al-Aqsa compound.

In 2015, Hotovely made headlines when she said her dream was to see an Israeli flag over the Temple Mount and insisted Jews be able to pray there.

Zeev Elkin

Jerusalem affairs minister Zeev Elkin of Likud has said that a full takeover of the compound should be Israel’s national goal.

“It is important to remove it [the Temple Mount] from the purview of the wild-eyed religious,” Elkin stated. “We must explain to broad swathes of the people that without this place, our national liberty is incomplete.”

Oren Hazan

Likud lawmaker Oren Hazan told the “Students for the Temple Mount” group that he would build the temple if he became prime minister.

When asked by this reporter how he would carry out the demolitions, he responded, “It would not be responsible at this point in time to tell you how we would do it, but I will say it clear and loud: when I have the opportunity to do it, I will.”

Yuli Edelstein

Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein of Likud said in 2012, “My job is to deal with the daily process, connecting and building the people of Israel, which leads to the Temple.”

Miri Regev

Culture minister Miri Regev of Likud proposed a bill to implement something similar at Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa compound to what Israel has imposed in Hebron.

Following the 1994 massacre by an American Jewish settler of 29 Palestinian worshippers at Hebron’s Ibrahimi mosque – another site sacred to Muslims and Jews – Israeli forces partitioned the mosque and turned the Old City into a ghost town.

Regev again called for a new arrangement immediately following the 14 July attack.

Ayelet Shaked

Justice minister Ayelet Shaked of Jewish Home, who published a genocidal call to kill Palestinian mothers just before the 2014 offensive on Gaza, has also called for unilaterally changing the status quo to allow Jews to pray at the al-Aqsa compound.

Uri Ariel

Agriculture minister Uri Ariel of Jewish Home is a leading figure in the Temple movement and has repeatedly called for the construction of a Jewish temple.

“We’ve built many little, little temples,” Ariel has said, “but we need to build a real temple on the Temple Mount.”

Gilad Erdan

Public security minister Gilad Erdan of Likud has also lent his support to this effort. “In my opinion, our right to the Temple Mount is unshakeable,” Erdan said at the Seekers of Zion conference in the Knesset in November.

Erdan is also in charge of Israel’s effort to fight the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.

Danny Danon

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, former deputy defense minister Danny Danon of Likud, has called to allow Jewish prayer at al-Aqsa.

Yitzhak Aharonovitch

A former public security minister, Yitzhak Aharonovitch of the Yisrael Beitenu party also came out in support in 2014. “It is important to open the [Temple Mount] to Jews, tens of thousands of worshippers come here,” he said.

Yehiel Hilik Bar

Deputy Knesset speaker and a former secretary-general of the nominally leftist Labor Party Yehiel Hilik Bar initially co-sponsored a bill with Miri Regev altering the status quo at al-Aqsa, however he pulled his backing after receiving criticism.

Bar said that he and the Labor party “are part of the Zionist center-left that sees our holy sites as the basis of our existence and the essence of our history.”

David Tzur, a former lawmaker for the ostensibly “dovish” Hatnua party, led by Tzipi Livni, has also called for Jewish prayer at the al-Aqsa compound.

Michael Ben-Ari

Among those who have led Israeli incursions into the compound is former lawmaker Michael Ben-Ari, a leading inciter against Africans and Palestinians who once destroyed a copy of the New Testament on video.

Build Temple “as soon as possible”

Other lawmakers who have demanded that Jews be able to pray at the al-Aqsa compound include former Knesset member Zvulun Kalfa of Jewish Home and Likud’s Ofir Akunis, who serves as science minister.

Smotrich, Shuli Muallem-Refaeli and Nissan Slomiansky of Jewish Home, and Miki Zohar, Avraham Neguise and Hazan of Likud signed a bill supporting Jewish prayer at al-Aqsa.

Yinon Magal of Jewish Home told the Knesset that Jews must be able to pray at the al-Aqsa compound and that a temple must be built as soon as possible.

Tourism minister Yariv Levin of Likud said, “It seems to me that when Jews for so many years sat in exile and prayed for a return to Zion, they did not mean Tel Aviv, but Jerusalem. They did not dream of returning to the Knesset building and the Prime Minister’s office, but to someplace else – to the Temple Mount.”

Minister for social equality Gila Gamliel of Likud has said, “the Temple is the ID card of the people of Israel.”

Lawmaker Arieh Eldad has gone up to al-Aqsa in demonstration of Israeli control.

A host of other lawmakers, including Amir Ohana and Anat Berko of Likud, have participated in conferences in support of the Temple Movement.

Dan Cohen is an independent journalist and filmmaker.

Netanyahu is prime responsible for bloodshed

Netanyahu is prime responsible for bloodshed

Several top Israeli officials have clearly called for executing Palestinians

Head of High Follow-Up Committee for Palestinians in Israel Mohamed Baraka accused Israel of using ongoing tension linked to Al-Aqsa Mosque to incite against them.
Netanyahu’s policy of ignoring recommendations from all sides including the leaders of his security institution would escalate the situation.
Head of High Follow-Up Committee for Palestinians in Israel Mohamed Baraka accused Israel of using ongoing tension linked to Al-Aqsa Mosque to incite against them.

Baraka noted that Israel is targeting leaders who “maintain the interests of the people and their national and religious rights,” noting that these leaders reject the ongoing violations against Al-Aqsa Mosque.

“The notable thing in this incitement campaign is that the top Israeli political leaders are practicing it,” he said, noting that only MKs and extremist settlers used to take part in such incitement in the past.

Baraka said that Arabs have been experiencing such a campaign for a long time: “We are worried about incitement, but we are not afraid of it,” he said. “This is an existence battle and all plans to domesticate us will fail.”

Therefore, he called on Palestinians in Israel to be cautious, but to “remain persistent,” stressing that their political stance is an “unalienable part of the resistance” of the Palestinian people anywhere.

With regard to the Israeli government’s request from Arab leaders to condemn the latest Palestinian resistance actions, he said that “this is a failed attempt to indict us because the prime responsibility for the bloodshed of both Arabs and Jews is [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu.”

He stressed that Netanyahu’s policy of ignoring recommendations from all sides including the leaders of his security institution would escalate the situation.

The Israeli Arabs or the Palestinians in Israel are the Palestinians who did not leave their homes during the first stage of the Israeli occupation in 1948 despite the savage Israeli massacres carried out against their fellow Palestinians

IDF Chief Says israel Is Becoming Like Nazi Germany, Refuses to Back Down

IDF Chief Says Israel Is Becoming Like Nazi Germany, Refuses to Back Down

The outgoing IDF chief has doubled down on his highly controversial comments he made comparing modern-day Israel with that of 1930’s Nazi Germany.

By Matt Agorist,

Featured image: Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, the Israeli army’s deputy chief of staff (Source: TheFreeThoughtProject.com)

Jerusalem – Last year, a top Israeli general’s comments during the country’s annual Holocaust Remembrance Day address sparked controversy when he likened the atmosphere in modern day Israel to 1930’s Nazi Germany

“If there is anything that frightens me in the remembrance of the Holocaust, it is discerning nauseating processes that took place in Europe in general, and in Germany specifically back then, 70, 80 and 90 years ago, and seeing evidence of them here among us in the year 2016,” Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, the Israeli army’s deputy chief of staff said.

Now, the outgoing IDF Deputy Chief has doubled down on his remarks and in an interview this week, defended his controversial speech.

As the Times of Israel reports, Golan, speaking in a new video interview produced by the military, said he “didn’t realize it would go to the very political place that it went,” but added that he “doesn’t take back the remarks.”

Golan went on to note that Israel  — “as a light unto the nations” — has a responsibility to maintain “moral superiority.”

“Morality is you compared to you. You compared to your standards, not to those around you. Around [Israel], there are murderous people who don’t hesitate to kill one another in fear-inducing quantities. That should give us no repose,” he said.

“On this issue, we shouldn’t cut ourselves any slack,” Golan added.

The reaction from Israeli hardliners to Golan’s comments highlighted the deep divisions within Israeli society on what is one of the country’s most solemnly revered days.

Nationalist Jewish home party leader and Israeli Education Minister Naftali Bennett called on Golan to revise his comments or be seen as comparing Israeli soldiers to Nazis. However, he refused and stood strong for over a year — in spite of the backlash.

Sadly, Bennett fails to understand that’s precisely what Maj. Gen. Golan was implying in 2016, as he implored those in power “to fundamentally rethink how we, here and now, behave towards the other.”

“The Holocaust, in my view, must lead us to deep soul-searching about the nature of man,” Golan said. “It must bring us to conduct some soul-searching as to the responsibility of leadership and the quality of our society. It must lead us to fundamentally rethink how we, here and now, behave towards the other.”

“There is nothing easier and simpler than fear-mongering and threatening. There is nothing easier and simpler than in behaving like beasts, becoming morally corrupt, and sanctimoniousness.”

“On Holocaust Remembrance Day, it is worthwhile to ponder our capacity to uproot the first signs of intolerance, violence, and self-destruction that arise on the path to moral degradation,” Golan said.

During his original speech, Golan referenced the Hebron incident, in which an IDF soldier was filmed executing an already incapacitated Palestinian assailant that was lying on the ground defenseless.

The soldier in question, Sgt. Elor Azaria, was arrested and brought up on manslaughter charges by a military tribunal for the killing — a move that has been met with ferocious opposition by Zionists who claim that the brazen execution was somehow justified.

Hard-liners accused the military of abandoning the soldier by indicting him for manslaughter, and polls showed most Jewish Israelis shared the sentiment. Many Israeli Jews also now openly oppose the equal rights of the one-fifth of the country’s 8 million citizens who are Arabs — who, in turn, are growing increasingly alienated from the Jewish state, according to the AP.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called his defense minister, Moshe Yaalon, after Golan’s speech to express displeasure, according to The Haaretz daily.

The Israeli military then issued a clarification, claiming Golan did not intend to compare Israel and its army to “the horrors” of Nazi Germany.

“This is an absurd and baseless comparison that he never would have made and it was never his intention to criticize the Israeli government,” the Israeli military said.

Regardless of how the Israeli government spun Golan’s words or pressured him to rebuke his comments, they clearly reveal a grave concern about the increasingly callous manner in which Palestinians are being treated and the path that these actions will ultimately lead Israeli society down.

Having such rationale and logic, Golan said he was surprised that the political leaders and large chunk of the population reacted the way they did.

“I thought I was saying things that were clear, that every reasonable person would say, ‘Hey, he said what had to be said.’ I didn’t think I was saying something that was blatantly controversial,” he said.

As the Times of Israel reports, eloquent in both Hebrew and English, Golan holds a master’s degree from Harvard University. He was wounded but continued to command during a shootout with Hezbollah fighters in 1997 and is a well-regarded officer in the IDF, holding a number of top positions in his 37-year career.

From ISIS to America, the state is able to convince their enforcers to commit horrid acts in their name — all the while their subjects cheering it on as patriotism. In spite of Golan’s dedication to the IDF, he is still able to see the potential for such destruction and his words should be considered by all countries.

Throughout history, very small groups of humans have been able to convince very large groups of humans to carry out evil and immoral acts of murder and abuse. It’s time to stop this.

While the citizens bash each other over silly issues of right vs. left or Islam vs. Christianity, those at the top get richer, more powerful and more tyrannical.

Race has disconnected us, religion has separated us, politics has divided us, and wealth has classified us. It is time we shatter this paradigm and see each other as humans — not flags, crosses, or classes. If we don’t, humanity’s short time on this planet will inevitably be brought to a violent end.

Only 52% of the American Public believe the U.S. would lie about foreign chemical weapons use

52% Say US Would Lie About Foreign Chemical Weapons

 by Grant Smith

American Public Twice as Skeptical as Mainstream Media

A statistically significant poll of the American adult Internet population reveals that 52.4% believe the US government would mislead them “about a foreign government’s use of chemical weapons in order to justify US military action.” 45.7% responded that they did not believe the US government would mislead them, while the remainder (1.9%) provided other responses.

Question: Do you believe the US government would ever mislead Americans about a foreign government’s use of chemical weapons in order to justify US military action?

The IRmep poll administered by Google Surveys has a RMSE score of 5.8 and was fielded July 5-22, just after Seymour Hersh’s stunning investigative report discrediting the official narrative justifying President Trump’s authorization to launch fifty-nine Tomahawk missiles at the Shayrat Air base in Syria on April 6.

The mainstream media narrative claimed the Syrian government under president Bashar al Assad bombed the rebel-held town of Khan Seikhoun with the deadly nerve agent sarin on April 4. Assad “choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children,” claimed President Trump. The U.S. Tomahawk strike targeted Shayrat because that is where the chemical weapons were prepared and loaded onto fighter bomber aircraft. According to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, “We feel that the strike itself was proportional, because it was targeted at the facility that delivered this most recent chemical weapons attack.”

US mainstream news media uncritically trumpeted the administration’s pretext as fact and that the retaliation was widely supported by the American people. A CBS News survey claimed “57 percent of Americans” approved of Trump’s military strikes. The question ABC presented to respondents (the question is not found within the body of news articles) April 7-9 presumed guilt. “In response to the Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons, do you approve or disapprove of the US launching airstrikes against Syrian military targets?”

A later Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted April 9-7 was similarly presumptive, but less conclusive. “Do you support or oppose President Trump’s decision to launch a missile strike on a Syrian air base in retaliation for the Syrian government using chemical weapons against civilians?” Only 51% of Americans supported the strikes, with 40% opposing and the rest offering no opinion.

Mostly excluded from the mainstream narratives were expert dissenting analysts. Robert Parry noticed “All the Important People who appeared on the TV shows or who were quoted in the mainstream media trusted the images provided by Al Qaeda–related propagandists and ignored documented prior cases in which the Syrian rebels staged chemical weapons incidents to implicate the Assad government.”

The single most damning assault on the official narrative was offered by veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh on June 25. Hersh built a reputation for breaking stories that upended official narratives, such as the My Lai massacre during the Vietnam War and torture at Abu Ghraib prison in Afghanistan. Increasingly driven away from American media outlets, Hersh relied on Germany’s Welt to reveal the weakness of official claims about Khan Seikhoun after US publications took a pass.

Hersh wrote that, based on sources inside the intelligence community, the CIA and DIA had “no evidence that Syria had sarin or used it.” He recalled that such an attack made no sense, since by the end of March the Trump administration had “abandoned the goal” of pressuring Assad to leave. The Russians, eager to gain US cooperation against Isis, warned the US in advance about the planned attack on the suspected rebel headquarters building in Khan Seikhoun as part of a comprehensive “deconfliction” program. Hersh noted that pictures of the dead and dying victims were uploaded to social media by local activists – in particular the “White Helmets” – who were “known for close coordination with Syrian rebels.”

A few days after the Hersh report, the UN Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons claimed that sarin was present in Khan Seikhoun. However, OPCW neither identified which parties were behind the release of sarin nor their motives. Russia claimed the OPCW analysis was fatally flawed, noting the US unwillingness to permit international inspections of Sha’irat airbase and lack of international inspectors at Khan Sheikhoun.

Many parties that wished to remain in the background are more interested in demonizing Russia, the Syrian government and ultimately precipitating US military attacks on Iran than on proving anything about what happened. In the US these parties include hardline neoconservatives, the Israel lobby and large numbers of interventionists in the Democratic and Republican parties. In their quest to present compelling narratives that bolster their policy preferences, they can be expected to be less interested in facts than irreversible actions that commit the US militarily. The mainstream media has proven – yet again – its willingness to quickly jump on such bandwagons with uncritical reporting and skewed public opinion polls.

Yet despite all the largely one-sided establishment news reporting, the IRmep poll suggests average Americans are twice as skeptical about claims of foreign chemical weapons use as the interventionists and their captured media outlets. Americans appear to be less willing to swallow what look like such tightly coordinated incidents-to-narratives because they have already been burned once by “slam-dunk” (but equally unfounded) claims of WMD’s as a pretext for the disastrous US invasion of Iraq.

In 2003, one hundred days after the Bush administration’s invasion – propelled by claims that Iraq had facilities to create weapons of mass destruction – were discredited 86% of Americans still believed the claims. One hundred days after the Trump administration’s Assad regime sarin claims, a majority of Americans believe the administration is perfectly capable of misleading them about such critical matters. As a US-Russia brokered ceasefire spreads, this popular skepticism is a healthy new development.

This skepticism could be enough to slow future dubious, immediate and allegedly “emotion-driven” US strikes on Iran if a charred Iranian passport were to turn up in a London Bridge-type terror attack. Or if unsubstantiated claims of “Iranian” chemical weapons use were suddenly unleashed across social media platforms – with compelling photos of the dead and dying for mainstream media to regurgitate – in yet another desperate battlefront such as Yemen.

Grant F. Smith is the director of the Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy in Washington and the author of the 2016 book, Big Israel:

%d bloggers like this: