by Roy Tov
Friday, April 27th, 2012

IDF Chief Admits Bluffing Iran

On April 25, 2012, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz gave a rare interview to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. As it invariably happens in recent years when Israeli leaders are interviewed, a possible war between Israel and Iran was at the center of the interview. Oddly enough, the general indirectly admitted Israel is bluffing Iran; this interview sums up to several others given recently by Israeli leaders into a very disturbing picture. Israel has not only disclosed the true message behind its public declarations, but also has heavily hinted at the result of any future negotiation.
The military option is the last chronologically, but the first in terms of its credibility. If it’s not credible it has no meaning. We are preparing for it in a credible manner. That’s my job, as a military man,” said General Gantz. This is a remarkably vague statement, especially by his inexplicable need to incessantly repeat the word “credible.” Judging his words from the point of view of a Hebrew speaker, such a statement is highly dubious. I wouldn’t buy anything from this man; he probably means Israel will not attack Iran, but wants Iran to believe it will. Afterwards he added: “[Iran] will be able to decide whether to manufacture a nuclear bomb. It hasn’t yet decided whether to go the extra mile,” and “as long as its facilities are not bomb-proof, the program is too vulnerable, in Iran’s view.” Here, he awkwardly admitted an error recently committed by Israel’s Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Strategic Affairs, Moshe “Bogie” Ya’alon on February 2 at the Hertzliya Conference. He said then that “the West has the ability to strike [Iran],” (see Israel Bluffs Iran for more details). Unluckily, Ya’alon was bluffing and got caught; one week before Ya’alon’s belligerent remarks, the Wall Street Journal reported remarks by US defense officials according to which the Pentagon is not in possession of conventional arms strong enough to destroy all of Iran’s nuclear facilities, due to their being too deep for bunker-buster bombs. As commented upon in the past, Israel gets its GBU-28 Bunker Buster bombs from the USA. Thus, Israel cannot perform better than the USA on such an attack, especially taking into account the IDF limitations. Ya’alon bluffed.

Are these inner wars in the Israeli leadership?

HypocrisyThis incongruence was so odd, that I made a shortlist of the main Israeli leaders opinions on the topic of a war with Iran. On October 28, 2011, I analyzed the situation in Israeli Defense Ministry Acknowledges Defeat. The article followed a comment on Israel’s incapability of defeating Iran in an interview given by Major General Amos Gilad, Head of the Israeli Defense Ministry’s Diplomatic-Security Bureau. The surprising comment was made in a “Friday’s Cathedra” event in Ashkelon. It was later cited by Yedihot Ahahronot, the largest Hebrew newspaper.
This couldn’t have been done without the silent support of the establishment. Gilad said that Netanyahu was the first to hear about a prediction of the Israeli intelligence services that Iran has decided to pursue the path of missiles and nuclear technologies development. He added that Netanyahu sees that as a “great threat,” and that this view is shared by Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The war plans of the latter were recently thwarted by the USA, at least until the November Presidential elections. Netanyahu’s support of the war is openly broadcast on an almost continuous basis by the Hebrew media: “Hold Me Back,” shouts Netanyahu. The support of a war on Iran is true also for Shimon Peres who openly supports an attack on Iran in all the relevant interviews he gave in recent months.
Yet, Nahum Barnea—a leading Yedihot Ahahronot journalist—said on that Friday that the IDF Head of Staff Beni Gantz, Mossad Director Tamir Pardo, Head of Aman (IDF Military Intelligence Corps) Aviv Kochabi, and the Head of Shin Beth Yoram Cohen—in other words, Israel’s leading generals—oppose an attack on Iran. In the past Meir Dagan—Pardo’s predecessor as Mossad Director—defined such an attack as a “foolish idea” in several interviews. In the Israeli media conventions, the former Mossad Director is the closest one gets to a formal statement by this secretive organization. All these points of view were supported in all open interviews appearing in the Hebrew media. 
Posters in Jerusalem | by the Youth of the Jewish Nationalistic Front
Let me further summarize: Leading Israeli politicians support war with Iran. Leading Israeli security services personnel oppose it. This is very odd. In the Israeli (and Western) reality, one expects the opposite: generals want war, politicians want industrial silence. Is this additional incongruence a sign of Jewish wisdom, or something else?
The hint to the truth is in the deed itself. General Gantz cannot give a free interview. IDF officers must get an approval for such an event; in the case of the IDF’s chief general, the approval must be given by the Minister of Defense himself. It is unlikely that Ehud Barak would have given such an approval without asking what General Gantz was planning to say on the issue of a war with Iran. Similarly, it is unlikely that General Gantz would utter an opinion contrary to the one of his boss without getting previous approval from Barak.
In other words, we are not witnessing inner wars in the Israeli leadership, but a conscious effort to create disinformation on the plans of the State of Israel. The sharp inversion of the typical roles (warring generals, cautious politicians) is a further attempt to create confusion

To war or not to war?

The truth is that probably even Netanyahu doesn’t know for sure if Israel will attack Iran. The USA has imposed a veto on such an action until November, but after November Israel may be tempted into a nuclear attack on Iran, as it has been analyzed in Is this Israel’s last Independence Day? Netanyahu wants to keep an ambiguous position on the issue, as he does on Israel’s nuclear capabilities. Yet, inadvertently, Netanyahu disclosed a bigger secret. Israel has lost its right to be considered an honest partner to any talks.
Shimon Peres—Israel’s president—may seem active, but his political career was finished in 1981, when he and Menahem Begin competed against each other in what became the hottest campaign in Israel’s short history. Labor was trying to return to power after it lost it for the first time to the Likud Party in 1977. Following two racist events during his campaign, a comedian working for the Likud, Sefy (nickname for Yosef) Rivlin, was invited to run the Likud television campaign. He conducted a successful personal campaign against Peres. Its motto was “Ken VeLo,” namely “Yes and No” in Hebrew. Peres was presented answering “yes and no” to everything he was asked (“Do you want sugar in your coffee?” “Yes and No! Yes and No!”). The combination of Peres’ shaky reputation with the funny voice used by Rivlin and his very disturbing eyes transformed Peres into a clown forever. Peres never won an open political campaign again.
In 2012, the Israeli leadership is repeating Peres’ error on a larger scale. “Yes and No; Attack and Don’t Attack,” it is saying. “Credibility” was repeated time and again by General Gantz in yesterday’s interview. Yet, he and Israel’s leadership lost their credibility forever.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

War of Nerves


By JOHN CHERIAN, February 2012
The West, along with “Israel”, is racheting up threats of an attack, but Iran appears unfazed.

REPORTS appear every other day in the Western media about an imminent “Israeli” strike against Iran. The Barack Obama administration keeps on repeating that “all options are on the table” against Iran. The United States armed forces have begun their biggest amphibious landing drill in the Persian Gulf region in more than a decade. The Pentagon recently doubled the number of aircraft carriers in the region. U.S. military and spy drones have been flying over Iran for some time now. Late last year, Iranians brought down a sophisticated U.S. drone.

The “Israeli” media are full of stories about the build-up of American troops in two small Gulf islands near the Strait of Hormuz. “Israeli” “Defense” Minister Ehud Barak, one of the architects of the massacre in Gaza three years ago, said in early February that “the window” for an effective military strike on Iran was rapidly closing because of the continuing development of uranium enrichment centrifuges by that country. “Israeli” Vice Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon declared that his country was confident of hitting any facility in Iran it chose to, saying that he was speaking from his experience as a former head of the “Israeli” armed forces.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy added his belligerent voice to the war discourse by saying that an attack on Iran would be justified if the country “continues its senseless race to get the bomb and threaten its neighbors”. Sarkozy seems to have conveniently forgotten that in the modern era, Iran never started a war. It has always been a victim of aggression. It was the West and the Arab monarchies that encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack Iran in 1980, leading to the eight-year war, which led to the loss of more than a million Iranian lives.

Teheran appears to be unfazed by the ratcheting up of threats from the West.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, speaking on the occasion of the 33rd anniversary of the Iranian revolution, said that the Islamic Republic would soon announce some “very important” achievements in the nuclear field.

The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, also reiterated that Iran would never give up its “rights” to a peaceful nuclear program. Iran has been consistently stating that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) it has every right to pursue a peaceful nuclear program. All of Iran’s nuclear facilities, including those engaged in uranium enrichment, are monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to ensure that weapons-grade uranium is not produced.

Khamenei warned the West against undertaking a military adventure, saying that if hostilities broke out, “it would be 10 times deadlier for the Americans” than it would be for Iran. Reacting to threats from “Israel”, he said the country was a “cancerous tumor” in the region, which had to be removed.
U.S. Secretary of “Defense” Leon Panetta told the media in Brussels in early February that there was a strong likelihood of “Israel” attacking Iran by the middle of the year. On December 20, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN that a whole range of options were being examined for military action against Iran. “I am satisfied that the options that we are developing are evolving to a point that they would be executable if necessary,” he said.

The right-wing government in “Israel” would like nothing better than precipitating a war with Iran. The hawkish government in “Israel” has coldly concluded that the Obama administration, readying itself for re-election later in the year, will have no other option but to finish the war that “Israel” wants to start. But the realists in the Obama administration know that Iran is not like neighboring Iraq, which they could occupy in a couple of weeks. President Obama, trying to tone down the talk of imminent war, said in the first week of February that the “Israelis” had not yet decided their course of action against Iran. He emphasized that the two countries would “work in lockstep, as we proceed to solve this, hopefully diplomatically”. Meanwhile, the Republican contenders for the U.S. presidency, with the exception of Ron Paul, are carrying on with their refrain of “bomb, bomb Iran”.

On the nuclear issue, the Iranian people are united as never before. The neighboring Arab monarchies are no doubt tacitly supporting the psychological and economic warfare being currently waged by the West against Iran, but they realize that Iran too has many cards to play. The Shia populations in these countries are already restive and are demanding their democratic rights. Senior Iranian officials have warned that if war breaks out, the Iranian army will target the U.S. military bases littering the Gulf countries. If shipping is affected in the choke point of the Strait of Hormuz, global oil prices are bound to shoot through the roof. Even the American consumer could be left with a big hole in his pocket during an election year. This will be detrimental to Obama’s chances of winning a second term.

On a parallel track, the U.S. has been trying desperately to arm-twist traditional friends and trading partners of Iran, like India, to implement the unilateral sanctions imposed by the West. When India’s Foreign Secretary, Ranjan Mathai, was in Washington recently for talks, the U.S. State Department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters that “how India might find alternative sources of energy” was among the important issues discussed. She said that the U.S. was trying to implement a “two-track policy, both to encourage countries to wean themselves from Iranian oil, but also to work with suppliers around the world to help countries find alternative sources of energy”.

The Saudi Arabian government has promised to ramp up the production of oil in order to meet any shortfall in case Iranian oil is forced out of the international market. Iran has described the unilateral sanctions imposed by the West as part of the “psychological warfare” being waged against it. In the first week of February, the Obama administration gave more powers to U.S. banks to freeze Iranian assets and close loopholes that would make it even more difficult for the Iranian government to transfer funds through international banking channels. Iran’s Vice-President, Mohammed Reza Rahimi, defiantly reacted to the latest set of sanctions by saying that Iran would make “the sanctions ineffective, as it has done in the past, and will continue selling oil”.

The sanctions, meanwhile, are beginning to affect the lives of ordinary Iranians. The Iranian rial has registered a steep decline against the dollar in recent months, leading to high inflation and rise in the prices of basic imported goods such as medicines.

India is among Iran’s biggest buyers of oil and gas. Senior Indian policymakers say that though the country’s dependency on Iranian oil is decreasing, Iran will continue to be a major supplier. Twelve per cent of India’s crude imports are from Iran. In January, India became the biggest importer of Iranian oil, displacing China. The announcement by the Indian government that it was planning to send a large trade delegation to Iran to strengthen economic ties has angered Washington. Commerce Secretary Rahul Khullar told the media in Delhi that India was implementing the United Nations-mandated sanctions against Iran but emphasized that the sanctions did not apply “to a vast range of products India supplies to Iran”.

With Iran agreeing to payment in rupees and other unconventional methods like barter trading, Indian officials made it clear that India would not be pressured by the West into taking steps that would have an adverse impact on the national economy. For that matter, even Pakistan has struck a defiant note. Despite open warnings from the U.S., Pakistan has announced that the work on the gas pipeline with Iran will continue. Washington was more successful with New Delhi on the gas pipeline issue. Under pressure from the Bush administration, India had withdrawn from the Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) project, saying that it was economically unfeasible and would give Islamabad undue leverage on the country’s energy security. Under American pressure, many major private Indian companies such as Reliance suspended their contracts with Iran for the supply of refined gasoline.

The Obama administration is naturally unhappy with India’s decision to broaden economic ties with Iran at this juncture. U.S. Congressmen have started raising the issue. Senator Robert Menendez, a Democrat speaking at the confirmation hearing for the Obama administration’s nominee for the Ambassador’s post in New Delhi, Nancy J. Powell, said that India “seems to be rebuking the sanctions” imposed by the West on Iran.

Senior Indian officials insist that they will continue dealing with Iran. They point out that until recently the West was urging India to cut economic ties with Myanmar in order to isolate the government there. Today, it is the West which is leading the charge to invest in that country. Indian officials predict that this situation will replicate itself in Iran within a couple of years.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Peres Raises Furor among Israeli Officials over Iran Attack Stance

Shimon PeresIsraeli President Shimon Peres has called on Israeli officials to stop their recently intensified war rhetoric against Iran, describing such anti-Iran remarks as unnecessary warmongering.

The Israeli daily Haaretz reported on Thursday that Peres is also scheduled to tell US President Barack Obama that Israel should not attack Iran in the near future. The two are due to meet in Washington, D.C., on Sunday March 4.

Haaretz said that Peres told the Israeli officials that there is no point in the “unceasing self-intimidation,” and that Israel should leave “the Iran issue to the superpowers, first and foremost the United States,”

Ehud BarakIsraeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak strongly criticized Peres’ comments saying that “with all due respect to various officeholders from the past and present, the rumor that there is [only] one government in Israel has also reached the United States,” Barak said sarcastically in private conversations, adding: “In the end, there is an elected [Israeli] government that makes the decisions and that is its responsibility.”

During Barak’s criticism, he made reference to Peres’ conduct in the early 1980s when Israel attacked the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak, when Menachem Begin was prime minister.

“It’s the same Shimon Peres who in 1981 opposed the bombing of the reactor in Iraq,” the defense minister said.

“Peres argued then that Begin was leading us to a holocaust, and there are those who claim that, to this day, Peres thinks the attack on the reactor was a mistake. Imagine what would have happened if the Americans and their allies had attempted to get [Iraqi dictator] Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait if he had three atomic bombs. The Americans said in retrospect that Begin was farsighted,” Barak reportedly said, according to Haaretz.

Source: Israeli Media

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Netanyahu: The US Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff is ‘serving Iran’!

The US top soldier, JCOS Gen. Martin Dempsey’s statement over this weekend has disappointed Israel prime ministe Benji Netanyahu so much that he called the General short of “a Jew hater“.
Gen. Dempsey denounced a strike on Iran in the near future as “destabilizing” and “not prudent” over the weekend while speaking to CNN’s Israel-Firster, Fareed Zakaria, in regards to America and Israel’s effort to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear warhead (or nuclear capability). The prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of the Zionist entity has called Dempsey’s statement “the US is adopting policies that will favor Iran, and not their historical ally: Israel“.

Discussing whether an attack on Iran seems worthwhile for the US military right now, Gen. Dempsey told Zakaria, “A strike at this time would be destabilizing and wouldn’t achieve their long-term objectives.”

Gen. Dempsey also repeated his 2008 evaluation of the Islam Republic, saying: “We are of the opinion that Iran is a rational player“. This remark angered Zionist Jew head of powerful Jewish think tank, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Dr. Richard N. Haass who said on MSNBC, today: “To call Iran a rational actor is code talk. Let me just make it clear, if you call them rational, that means that deterrence works and that means that you’re willing to live with an Iran that has nuclear weapons“. Apparently, the con-Zionist wants Americans to believe that Israel doesn’t have 240-400 nuclear weapons.

“Iran is unlikely to initiate or intentionally provoke a conflict,” US Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess told a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week, adding that “an Iranian-led military action against the US would only be likely if the United States fired first“.
American intelligence believes that, if Iran is indeed developing a nuclear weapon as rumored, they do not stand to finish their research anytime soon. In the interim, the US hopes that diplomatic talks and negotiations will thwart that research before it matures. Israel, however, appears much more concerned and has condemned the US for not acting on the offensive already. Last month, Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon explicitly called the Obama administration “hesitant” in their unwillingness to attack, which was followed by a warning only a day later by the nation’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, in which he urged the US to “move from words to deeds.”

Last year, Obama’s selection of General Martin Dempsey as new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was approved unanimously by the House under Israel Lobby (AIPAC) instruction. Amir Oren wrote in Israeli daily Ha’aretz (June 1, 2011) that Dempsey being a friend of Israel for a long time, brings good news for Israel on war against Iran.

Interestingly, Admiral Mike Mullen, Gen. David Petraeus, Panetta and Gen. Dempsey have all bullied Iran with “all options on table”. However, after US occupation forces’ defeat in Iraq by Maliki-Ahmadinejad shrewed politics and temporary closure of Strait of Hormuz without firing a single missile – Obama administration has come to the conclusion that a new military adventure in Iran on behalf of Israel is not worth for the risk for the time being. Washington now wants to wait for the results in Syria and Lebanon. Islamophobe Sen. John McCain while hugging Netanyahu in Jerusalem, agreed with Richard Haass’ statement.

Last year, Rep. Ron Paul, said that it’s high time for the US to learn to live with a nuclear Iran.

Netanyahu: The US Chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff is ‘serving Iran’!


“… Netanyahu, who in the past has called for expulsion of Palestinians from their West Bank home and boasted of derailing the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords, accused Dempsey of “serving Iranian interests,” according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz (“The Land”), which wrote:

“We made it clear to Donilon that all those statements and briefings only served the Iranians,” a senior Israeli official said. “The Iranians see there’s controversy between the United States and Israel, and that the Americans object to a military act. That reduces the pressure on them.”

Likely officials of the far right wing Likud Party were especially angered by Dempsey’s assessment that the Iranian leadership is made up of “rational actors.” Israel and its media agents in the United States have expended enormous resources in attempting to convince the US public that the Iranian leadership is made up of mad mullahs obsessed with the end of the world who would gleefully light the nuclear match that brought about an apocalypse. (All this completely untrue and mere racist pablum.) To have the top military man in the United States undo the work of millions of dollars worth of propaganda must have been galling indeed.
Netanyahu’s charge that Dempsey is “serving Iran” is completely unacceptable and deserves a stern rebuke from the Obama administration if it is not going to make itself look like a complete set of wusses… …
If it is the fact, as the Israeli right wing kept loudly insisting, that Saddam Hussein was a dire threat to Israel, then they might show a little gratitude and respect to a man like Dempsey, who deployed to Iraq to take down that regime and build a new one.
It is not OK that Netanyahu and Barak spoke this way about this man.
Why Barack Obama continually lets Netanyahu humiliate him is completely beyond my understanding. He should call off the March 5 meeting now planned with Netanyahu and let him cool his heels till he apologizes.
And, I’ll bet you that the supposedly super-patriotic Republican candidates won’t dare so much as say “boo” to Tel Aviv over this insult to Dempsey– in fact, the chicken hawks are likely to pile on him on behalf of their Christian and Jewish Zionist donors.….”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Eye on the Enemy: Barak to Syrian Opposition: I Can Do Nothing

Local Editor 

Barak to Syrian Opposition: I can do nothing
Army Radio
“Israeli” “Defense” Minister Ehud Barak, during an interview with Army Radio, said that “the intercepting system of multiple layers missiles is a national task of the first class, since we are facing a financial reduction of at least 3 billion shekels from the basic defense budget, which is being all disbursed in “Israel” “.” The defense system buys from the “Israeli” market, which is a source for business and export. “

“Syrian National Council” Asks Israel for Help

The “defense” minister said that “the fate of al-Assad regime is definite, he will be ousted, and “we are carefully overseeing the situation to make sure that no weapons are being smuggled from Syria to hostile parties.”
Barak in response to the statements made by Syrian opposition asking “Israel” to intervene in to topple al-Assad, he said “given the means in our hands, I can do nothing.”ـــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــــ

Why “Israel” is concerned of the Syrian weaponry smuggling to Lebanon?
Ma’ariv – Hanan Greenberg
The strong relationship between Syria and Lebanon, which include the smuggling of weapons, is not a new situation and it is going “non-stop”. Even the UN resolution 1701 adopted by the Security Council at the end of the Second Lebanon War, which stated the prohibition of arms smuggling to Hizbullah, has not been respected by both parties since a long time.

Today, as the Syrian regime is approaching to its end, the concern in “Israel” is increasing because someone will try to direct the attention towards us. Risks prevail due to the smuggling of arms into Lebanon that will reach Hizbullah directly. An increase in the number of combatants of Islamic Jihad that will enter Syria is expected as well. Some frustrated army officers might likely direct their anger towards “Israel”.

During a chaotic situation, as always, we are not able to identify who will take over the stores of arms of Syria. The matter is related to other elements such as the advanced anti-aircraft systems, rockets and certainly chemical and biological weapons.

When Qaddafi’s regime was toppled in Libya, lots of weapons were imported to Sinai, and without obstruction they reached Gaza Strip. There is a similar scenario in Syria, where extremists easily arrive at store weapons there, this may be a red line for “Israel”, and cannot include it on the agenda. “

5 Brigades’ Drills Cancelled
Channel 2
“Is the “Israeli” army affected by the economic crises?

Due to the financial cuts of the “Israeli” army, primary five exercises planned to be done this year have been cancelled. Moreover, a joint maneuver is likely to be cancelled too.

High-ranking officers confirmed that the cancellation of the exercises was necessary in the light of the Chief of Staff’s decision to preserve the rehabilitation of cadets’ bases and the activities of the regular units.
The officers said that “a big part of budget is not flexible and cannot be changed, for example, the payments to the bereaved families, the rehabilitation of wounded soldiers, and agreements signed by the Army for the procurement of sophisticated systems.”

In addition to the cancellation of the exercises, the “Israeli” army decided to reduce the ammunition allocated to the units in need. On the other hand, the number of reserve units hat will be recruited for operational activity will be reduced. The army warned that “in fact, this year in light of the risks that led to the deterioration of the region we had to practice more. It is forbidden to go back to the days before the Second Lebanon War.”

Source: Hebrew newspapers, Translated and Edited by

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Barak: Assad Has Only ‘Few Weeks’ Left in Power, the collapse of Assad’s regime would constitute a "severe blow to the radical axis,"

Local Editor
The family of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has only “a few weeks” left in control of the strife-torn country, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak told MPs on Monday.

“The Assad family has no more than a few weeks to remain in control in Syria,” Barak told the parliament’s prestigious foreign affairs and defense committee in remarks quoted by the committee spokesman.

“There is no possibility in the current situation of evaluating what will happen the day after Bashar’s fall,” he said.

Barak also warned that the fall of the Assad family could have implications for the ‘Israeli’-occupied Golan Heights.

“In the north, there may be possible implications from Syria on the Golan Heights and a broader area as the result of the loss of control,” he said on Monday in a separate statement released by his office.
According to Barak, the Assad regime was deteriorating as a result of the combination of internal and external pressures.

“Even if it is hard to clearly see the exact date when the regime will fall, the trend is clear, and with every day that passes, the regime is getting closer to the end of its rule, and its grip is loosening,” he said.

But the Zionist defense minister did not foresee significant international intervention in Syria for the time being, since the world “understands that there is no alternative to the current regime yet.”
The collapse of Assad’s regime would constitute a “severe blow to the radical axis,” he said, putting an emphasis on the impact it would have on Tehran.

President al-Assad: We tell them that their Words are Worthless!

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Turki al Faisal & Ehud Barak: "Assad’s regime is a killing machine … It’s going to disappear in a few weeks!"


Assad’s government “has become a killing machine,” says Turki bin Faisal of Saudi Arabia, “Change in Syria is now inevitable.”…Speaking a day after Turki at the Vienna meeting, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak echoed the prince’s prediction about the Assad regime: “It is doomed. . . . It is going to disappear, in a few weeks.”
“Iran is a paper tiger, but it has steel claws,” Turki added. The Saudi prince was referring not only to Syria but also to the heavily armed Hezbollah militia in Lebanon and the Palestinian movement Hamas…
They as well as Damascus are now the targets of a Sunni counterrevolution that has reached critical mass as Iran continues to be accused of working on a nuclear weapon and as U.S. troops withdraw from Iraq, a Shiite-majority nation that will increasingly be subject to Iranian influence and ambition.
Russia, too, appears to invest larger meaning in the Syrian conflict. “Vladimir Putin scores the Libya result as a win for the West and thus a defeat for Russia,” says a European ambassador who monitors intelligence reporting on the Kremlin. “He is determined that Syria will not make this a trend, and Russia will oppose collective action against Assad wherever it can.”
Putin’s return to a zero-sum calculus reminiscent of the Cold War has cast a heavy shadow over secret, informal talks among the United States, Britain and France and those with the leading Sunni countries on hastening Assad’s downfall. So out of deference to Russian sensitivities, these talks have steered clear of any discussion of the kind of coordinated NATO intervention that occurred in Libya. But diplomatic sources report that there is an active exchange of intelligence and tentative discussion of some form of joint operations, as well as an intensifying common effort to help Syria’s emerging opposition forces become more organized and effective…
I doubt that Assad pays much attention to this gathering consensus. Certainly his father, Hafez, whom I interviewed three times, would have dismissed it…”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The US and Israel: An Increasingly Uneasy Alliance

The US and Israel: An Increasingly Uneasy Alliance

Israel’s Defence Minister Ehud Barak (L) sits across from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) during the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem 4 December 2011. (Photo: REUTERS – Gali Tibbon)
Published Monday, December 5, 2011
As developments continue to unfold in the Middle East, one thing seems to be increasing besides the campaign against the Syrian regime: American frustration with Israel and its policies (or lack thereof).
This time, US defense secretary Leon Panetta just couldn’t control his temper, calling on Israel to “just get to the damned table” to negotiate a settlement with the Palestinian authority. This is the third time the defense secretary has revealed a divergence with Israel and its policies…or lack thereof.

What this highlights is the quagmire Israel is in – and together with it the US, because of its alliance with Israel. Panetta says that Israel is becoming more and more isolated and calls on it to repair its ties with countries like Egypt, Turkey and Jordan. “Israel can reach out and mend fences with those who share an interest in regional stability – countries like Turkey, Egypt and Jordan,” Panetta said. He goes on to add that such a step “is not impossible.” This is the second time Panetta has underscored this isolation, and his assessment is correct (take for example the Egyptian protests against Israel in front of the Israeli embassy in Cairo after Israel killed Egyptian soldiers on the border with Gaza).

The dilemma here for both the US and Israel is that Israel has the wrong government at the wrong time. While changes are underway in the Middle East, Israel has a government whose members reflect the rise of the right wing in Israeli society (a combination of the ultra orthodox and settler movement). While Panetta points to the urgent necessity for Israel to change in a changing region, its government has the most diplomatically inept cabinet which is, or at least appears to be, totally out of touch with reality. This government, as many argue, appears to be indifferent to Israeli interests, let alone America’s, while some members of its cabinet are far too blasé about American support and simply take it for granted. There is probably no other government that is so incapable of change or pragmatic policies.

In fact Panetta expresses his opposition to Israeli policies (or lack thereof) when he says, “I believe security is dependent on strong military, but it is also dependent on strong diplomacy.” The end result is that Israel is bringing more doom to itself and to the US as long as Washington continues to stand with Israel unconditionally, which it will do at least for the foreseeable future (and especially from now until the US presidential elections.) It is from here that we can understand the frustration in Panetta’s statements, his tone and his body language.

Moreover, Panetta’s focus on Israeli reconciliation with countries like Turkey also reveals frustration on part of the defense secretary. The US is in great need of a player like Turkey (as can be seen from the Syrian file) and Turkey is proving to be a great partner for Washington. But while the US has its share of leverage over Turkey, there will be limits to this leverage as long as the crisis between Turkey and Israel over the flotilla incident continues. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan must be careful in responding to all American demands, as this may lead to an internal backlash against the PM by making him appear like a servant to Israel – precisely because of America’s unconditional support for Israel.

This could cause much damage to Erdogan, especially because Israel killed Turkish citizens in international waters. From here we can understand Panetta’s call on Israel to help build regional support for Israeli and US security objectives.

Then we come to the biggest American fear of them all: a military strike on Iran. Again Panetta comes out hard against this option, at the same time implying that Israel has a different view. He says, quite bluntly, “we have to be careful about the unintended consequences” that a strike on Iran would have, pointing to the danger it would subject US troops and bases in the region to (and the second time he has said as much). Not to mention his comments that a strike would “at best” delay Iran’s nuclear program. He cannot be any more straightforward in his opposition to the military option which Israel advocates.
So if anyone was in doubt about Israel becoming a strategic liability for the US, the US defense minister has shown that in today’s Middle East Israel is becoming just that. This actually began to unfold before the Arab spring, when the current CIA chief David Petreaus said, back when he was head of Centcom, that the continuance of the Israeli Palestinian conflict was adversely affecting the American military presence and its interests in the region due to American favoritism towards Israel. Now it has become more evident as the Middle East has seen US allies fall, the people gaining a much larger say and US military dilemmas in Iraq and Afghanistan continue. (Iraq especially will emerge as another case in a new Middle East which is not in line with American interests due to the special ties that now exist between Baghdad and Tehran).

So America realizes that change is needed if it wants to continue to be a significant regional player in a strategically oil-rich region. It also realizes change is needed to secure a somewhat acceptable outcome in Iraq and Afghanistan (which may explain why most of the statements that point to Israeli US divergence are from defense and military officials).

But change will only come through two scenarios. Either the Israeli government changes its behavior which is an extremely remote possibility; or, the US makes certain changes to the nature of its alliance with Israel. This second option also seems far-fetched, especially as election day in the US draws closer, but in the end it seems the US will have to choose between its own interests and its unconditional support for Israel.

Ali Rizq is Press TV News Director in Beirut.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Turkey & Israel’s epitaph of Syria!


Abdallah Gul

“…“Sadly, things in Syria have reached a dead end and unfortunately things do not look bright in Syria…I strongly believe that there is no place any more for authoritarian regimes — single party systems that do not have accountability or transparency — on the shores of the Mediterranean,”

Ehud Barak,

“… Syria’s president has reached “a point of no return… I think that he went beyond the point of no return, no way that he will he resume his authority or legitimacy, …And it’s clear to me that what happened a few weeks ago to Qaddafi… and what happened ultimately to Saddam Hussein, now might await him,” he said…”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Ben-Eliezer: ‘Stop those two fools attacking Iran’

Former Israeli defense minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, told fellow Labour Party members: “Every citizen in the country has to be worried that these two fools, Netanyahu and Barak, are planning an attack on Iran,” quoted by Jewish daily Forward on November 8, 2011.

 The Greatest Threat To World Peace

Benji Netanyahu has claimed that the latest IAEA reoprt proves he was right about Iran’s intention to produce a nuclear bomb – and French President Nicolas Sarkozy was wrong calling him a liar.

Benji’s ‘smoking gun’, the latest IAEA report, itself claims that all its allegations against Islamic Republic are not based on its staff findings but on informations provided by various foreign government agencies. Interestingly, the said report also targets another of Israel’s enemy, Pakistan without mentioning Israeli and India’s illegal nuclear stockpiles. A case of Zionists killing two birds with one stone!

Last week, Israeli President Shimon Peres had said that a military attack against Iran is growing increasingly by the days.

On Tuesday, Israeli defense miniter, Ehud Barak, backed-down from an immediate military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, “War is not a picnic. We want a picnic. We don’t want a war,” Barak told Israel Radio.

Yossi Alpher, former director of Jeffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University wrote in daily Forward (November 9, 2011) that Israeli threats of a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure are not going to happen in the near future. It reflects an Israeli attempt to generate strong international sanctions against Iran. “Right now, though, hype, pressure and deterrence appear to be name of the game,” wrote Yossi.

According to well-respected Israeli journalist Nahum Barnea, the entire Israeli security-intelligence establishment, some senior cabinet members and foreign ZOGs leaders have advised Benji and Barack not to carry out their suicidal military attack against Iran – at least for the time being. Nahum has claimed in his recent column in Yediot Aharonot that Gen. Benny Gants, head of IOF; Gen. Aviv Cochavi, head of IOF intelligence; Mossad director Tamir Pardo and Shin Bet head Yoram Cohen, are all against Israeli strike against Iran without an active participation of US forces on Israeli side.

The former Mossad director, Gen. Meir Dagan, reportedly called Netanyahu-Barak’s promoting a military adventure against Iran, as “the stupidest idea I have ever heard“. So what is holding back these Zionist evildoers? Because they fear the Israeli attack could become the end of Israel – Tens of thousands of missiles and rockets from Iran, Hizbullah, Syria and Hamas falling all over Israel; a regional war that could last for years; attacks on Israeli targets abroad; world-wide rage against the Zionist entity, already isolated from most of the world nations and creating a unified Arab support for Iran against Israel.

The predictions that the Islamic Republic will soon acquire a nuclear bomb have been parroted for the last 30 years. During that period western ZOGs and press have claimed repeatedly that Islamic Republic is about to join the nuclear club. Such a result is always declared “unacceptable” and a possible reason for military action, with “all options on the table” to prevent upsetting the Muslim East strategic balance dominated by the USrael.

Since Yukiya Amano took over as head of IAEA, the agency’s reports has always reflected US-Israel agenda. Why? Because, according to US embassy cables, published by Guardian on December 2, 2010, proves that Amano is an American agent.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Gilad Atzmon: The Greatest Threat To World Peace

Saturday, October 29, 2011 at 10:00AM AuthorGilad Atzmon

According to Ynet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are extremely concerned by the “Iranian threat”. Yedioth Ahronoth, the Israeli leading paper, reported this week that Netanyahu and Barak are pushing for action against Iran.
According to Israeli leading columnist Nahum Barnea the heads of the armed forces –and Mossad are opposed to taking action against Iran at this time.

Former Mossad Chief Meir Dagan had previously stated that an aerial attack on Iran was “a foolish idea” and warned against the disastrous consequences that would follow such action – an all out regional war. As it seems Dagan lost his job for expressing his views on the matter.

It looks as if Israel are preparing the ground for an attack on Iran that would probably escalate into a vile world conflict. Israeli leadership seems to fail to grasp the meaning of it all. This leadership has managed to buy itself the reputation of being impervious to the notion of culpability and responsibility. It basically fails to understand the consequences of it is actions.

But far more devastating is the idea that Jewish Lobbies around the world are also far from being responsible to their actions. Liam Fox who resigned last week from being the British Defence Secretary, was heavily supported by the Jewish Lobby. He was also an enthusiastic advocate of an attack on Iran. Whether Fox was a ‘Mossad agent’, a ‘Jewish lobby’s puppet’ or even just a ‘useful idiot’ is yet to be decided. However, he was clearly serving Israeli interests in our midst.
But he wasn’t alone, at the moment 80% of our leading party are Conservative Friends of Israel.
Isn’t the time ripe to drift as far as possible from Jerusalem and its stooges?

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Prisoners Swap Deal in Israeli Eyes: Accord Strengthens Hamas

Local Editor

Israeli officials admitted on Sunday that the prisoners swap deal, secured between the Zionist entity and Hamas, was in favor of Hamas, voicing the “need” to set new rules for next deals.
Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni said the deal had shifted the balance of power towards Hamas.

“The whole world understands that extremist Hamas has been strengthened”, she told public radio.

Livni added that “Israel is losing its military deterrence,” and that the next phase of the prisoner exchange, in which another 550 Palestinian prisoners are to be released, must be “coordinated with Abbas, rather than with Hamas.”

For his part, Israeli “Defense” Minister Ehud Barak said that Israel needed new rules for prisoners swap deals.

“I’m happy about the deal on the exchange for Gilad Shalit, but we must set new rules,” Barak told Israeli daily newspaper Israel Hayom.

Barak said it was important for Israel to draft rules that were in keeping with the policy adopted by other Western nations.
“A profound change is need… The new rules must take into account our national interests, and be closer to those adopted by various Western nations like that United States, Britain and Australia,” Barak said.

Hamas security men keep watch as a bus c

These declarations came just few days after the Zionist entity and Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, secured a deal in which the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit was released in exchange for Hundreds of Palestinian detainees.

Source: Israeli Media

“The people want a new Shalit,”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

“Turkey is not an enemy of Israel and the conflict between the two countries will eventually pass”,

“They are not loyal to agreements between us in the defense industry,” Erdogan said. “There might be problems, you may not be speaking to each other, but (LIKE ME) you have to fulfill your responsibility under international agreements.” (NATO AGREEMENTS)


Turkey Raises the Bar with Israel, Barak Undermines Conflict

Local Editor
Barak: “This wave will pass…
We are the two countries that are most
important to the West in the region”

Adding to tensions with Israel, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused the Zionist entity on Wednesday of failing to meet its obligations in defense deals, saying that no matter the price “we will not let Israel disrespect Turkey.”
Turkish-Israeli crisis in relations have escalated after Israel refused to apologize for its raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla which martyred nine people last year.

Asked to comment on Turkey’s decision to suspend defense industry deals, Prime Minister Erdogan told reporters Israel wasn’t keeping to the terms of defense agreements, accusing it of not returning drones that Turkey had bought from Israel and sent back for maintenance.

“They are not loyal to agreements between us in the defense industry,” Erdogan said. “There might be problems, you may not be speaking to each other, but you have to fulfill your responsibility under international agreements.”

Erdogan said Wednesday Turkey was determined to keep up its stance toward Israel at any cost. “We don’t care if it costs $15 million or $150 million,” Erdogan said. “We will not allow anyone to walk all over our honor.”

Erdogan reiterated that Turkey was planning possible new sanctions against Israel, but refused to disclose what they could entail. He said Turkey intended to increase the Turkish navy’s surveillance of the eastern Mediterranean, adding that parts of it were Turkey’s “exclusive economic zones.” All the pros and cons of this have been calculated. We were present in these waters in the past, we are present today and we will continue to be present tomorrow.”

Despite the intense Turkish stance, Israeli officials insist on undermining the tense in relations. “Turkey is not an enemy of Israel and the conflict between the two countries will eventually pass”, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in an interview with Israel Radio on Thursday morning.

Barak reiterated his regret over the death of the activists aboard the Mavi Marmara, but not on the use of force.

In response to the recent “price tag” attack at an army base outside the Beit El settlement Wednesday morning, Barak said that these actions need to be handled with an iron fist.

The defense minister also noted that it is still possible to dissuade the Palestinians from seeking statehood at the UN later this month.

Source: Websites


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Barak Suspends Transfer Deal, Says Syria Involved in killing Hariri

Local Editor
Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak suspended transfer of 84 bodies to the Palestinian Authority Monday at last moment, knowing that PM Benjamin Netanyahu have approved its accomplishment.

According to Zionist Haaretz daily, Barak suspended the deal due to the important role it played in any future exchange deal for captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Haaretz reported that Barak’s step came after he was informed that the remains of “Awadallah brothers”, Hamas members who Israel killed in 1998, were among the bodies.

The paper added that Israel was refusing to return the bodies of “Awadallah brothers”, but later changed its stance and accepted using them as a bargain chip in Shalit’s deal.

On another level, the Zionist Minister commented on the recently issued indictment that accused members of Hezbollah, clarifying that “Lebanon is facing a harsh shock.” He revealed that the Syrian government will also be accused in PM Rafiq Hariri’s assasination.

“This issue shows us who we are dealing with and who the neighbors we live amongst are,” Jerusalem Post quoted Barak as saying.

[ 05/07/2011 – 12:35 PM ]

WEST BANK, (PIC)– Senior Israeli ministers have reneged at the last minute on transferring the bodies of 84 Palestinian martyrs being held at the secret Cemetery of Numbers to the Palestinian Authority.

Most of the bodies have been held by the Israel military since 1967.

Israeli military minister Ehud Barak has decided to suspend the process until further notice after he consulted with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a military ministry spokesman has said.

Israeli news outlets say the decision to release the bodies was held off after the move drew heavy criticism from the relatives of those killed in Palestinian resistance operations and other Israeli circles.

The sources say Barak was unaware of the identities of those who would be released in the operation and that handing over the bodies could harm negotiations in a deal that would see the release of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

The Palestinian national campaign to retrieve the bodies of the martyrs said that Israel is holding more than 334 Palestinian bodies in secret graveyards known as the Cemetery of Numbers.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Israel woos China on Iran

After humiliating Barack Obama during his visit to Washington last month – Benji Netanyahu has decided to sell American military technology to China.

Last week, Israeli defense minister/deputy prime minister, Ehud Barack visited Beijing to put a wedge between Iran-China relation. In his talk with his Chinese counterpart, Barak tried to scare Chinese leader of Iran’s nuclear threat. He also discussed the expected PA’s resolution for an independent Palestinian state based on 1967 borders at United Nations General Assembly in September 2011.
Barak offered to sell China American military technology as a ‘sweetner’. China has shown its willingness to accept Barak’s offer as long as there are no strings attached to China-Iran relations. In the past, the Zionist regime was forced by Washington to cancel its sale of US-made advanced Phalcon spy planes to China in 2000 and of spare parts for US-Israeli-built Harpy drones in 2005. However, China has remained one of Israel’s main trading partner with an average $7 billion annual trade.
Jewish drug dealers such as Persian David Sassoon (died 1864) build the Zionist-Chinese connection. Japanese created Jewish settlements in their Chinese colonies, during the period of 1934-45. The settlements in Harbin (Manchuria) were envisaged as an ‘Israel in Asia’ . The Harbin-Israel connection can also be found in the family of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Olmert’s parents and grandparents reached Harbin from Samara, European Russia, at the time of the Bolshevik Revolution. In the summer of 2004, when he was Israel’s vice premier and trade minister, Ehud Olmert “returned” to China with a delegation of Israeli businessmen. He and his brother, an agricultural attaché at the Israeli embassy in Beijing, were much photographed reciting the Jewish prayer for the dead at their grandfather’s tomb.
The Israelis and their western Zionist poodles are desperate to persuade China that Islamic Republic is becoming an increasing danger to the Middle East and further afield – well, mostly Israel. However, China has huge interests in Iranian oil and gas resources. In 2010, China reportedly invested $40 billion in Iran.
Both China and Russia need friendly relations with Tehran to keep it isolated from Muslim-majority states under their occupation. The last thing the rulers in Beijing and Moscow want – is Tehran supporting Muslim resistance groups in East Turkistan and Chechnya fighting against Chinese and Russian occupation.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Ehud Barak: "Bashar Assad has lost his legitimacy "


Barak: Syria’s Assad has lost his legitimacy – Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Have Barak Joined The "GRAND ARAB REVOLUTION" Or What?

ما هذا… باراك معنا في الخندق؟

ابراهيم الأمين
التناقض في الروايات بشأن ما يجري في سوريا لا يمنع رؤية صورة وافية من المشهد هناك. الحكم بقيادة الرئيس بشار الأسد أخذ برأي جهات أمنية تشير إلى تعاظم نفوذ مجموعات مسلحة في مناطق عدة، وخصوصاً في درعا. وأوصت هذه الجهات بضرورة العمل سريعاً لاحتواء هؤلاء قبل أن ينجحوا في تحويل كل الاحتجاج إلى حركات تمرد مسلحة. وبناءً على ذلك، تقررت الحملة العسكرية في درعا ومحيطها. وثمة الكثير من المعلومات التي لم تصل بعد إلى الجمهور، وخصوصاً عن حجم الخسائر البشرية في صفوف المدنيين والعسكريين وأعداد المعتقلين، وعن حقيقة الوضع القائم هناك الآن. لكن ما قاله مسؤولون سوريون لمتصلين بهم من بيروت، أنه جرى احتواء الظاهرة المسلحة بدرجة عالية، وأنه بات بالإمكان الحديث عن انحسار في هذه الموجة، وأنه يتوقع انعكاس للأمر على مناطق أخرى في ريف دمشق أو في مناطق الساحل.

هل انضم الأخ باراك إلى جبهة المنتفضين، أم ماذا؟

وبمعزل عن كل الروايات التي يسوقها الإعلام السوري، أو تلك التي يقول النظام إنه سيكشف عنها في وقت قريب، لا يزال المشهد السياسي والشعبي في سوريا على درجة عالية من القلق، وخصوصاً أن الظاهرة المسلحة لا تمثّل في أقصى حدودها 15 إلى 20 في المئة من مجموع المتظاهرين الذين خرجوا في مناطق عدة من سوريا يطالبون بالإصلاح. وحتى أجهزة الأمن هناك، لا تتوقع انحساراً كلياً لظاهرة الاحتجاجات، لكنها تأمل ـــــ على ما يبدو ـــــ أن تُضبَط مسارات هذه الاحتجاجات ومستوياتها.
منطق الفريق الأمني في سوريا يقول إن على السلطة الإمساك بالأرض أولاً، ثم الذهاب نحو الحوار. لكن الفريق الأمني قلما كان مستعداً للمساءلة عن نتائج ما يقوم به، عن نوع الأخطاء التي ترتكب بداية، أي عند تشخيص المشكلة، وثانياً عندما يتخذ القرار بخطوات قمعية، وثالثاً عند تنفيذه هذه الخطوات. وبمعزل عن كل ما يقال، إن إحدى أهم مسؤوليات السلطات السورية، هي جعل ما قامت به قوات الأمن في درعا أو في مناطق أخرى تحت سقف المساءلة، أي أن يتاح للجمهور، من خلال وسائل متعددة، التدقيق في ما حصل، وهو ما يقود مجدداً إلى الملاحظة الأهم، وهي أن الإعلام الرسمي في سوريا يعاني أزمة ثقة تاريخية مع الجمهور، وبالتالي فإنه معني، كما الحكومة من خلفه، كما أجهزة الأمن، بتقديم روايات موثقة، قابلة لأن تكون محل ثقة الجمهور في سوريا قبل خارجها، حتى يؤخَذ بها.
والمشكلة في هذا الجانب تتصل بأن عمليات القمع التي حصلت في مناطق عدة، اتسمت بالعنف، وثمة من يصفه بالعنف المفرط أو العنف غير المنظم أو خلافه، لكنه عنف من النوع الذي يؤدي إلى سقوط ضحايا وخسائر، ويهز الثقة أكثر بين المواطن ومؤسسات الدولة، فضلاً عن أن جانباً من هذا العنف ومن الاعتقالات التعسفية، جرى بعد إعلان قرار رفع حالة الطوارئ، مع ما يعني ذلك من إجراءات مختلفة في حالة المواجهة بين الأمن والمواطن؛ إذ يبدو أن السلطة نفسها بحاجة إلى تمرين قبل الناس.
وبانتظار الأيام المقبلة، وخصوصاً يوم الجمعة المقبل، ستظل الأنظار شاخصة إلى ما يجري الآن داخل سوريا. لكن من المهم النظر أيضاً إلى ما يجري خارج سوريا؛ لأنّ من الغباء عدم الالتفات إلى استعجال الغرب وبعض العواصم العربية لاستثمار موجة الاحتجاجات القائمة الآن بقصد القيام بخطوات تهدف إلى النيل من نظام الحكم في سوريا، ليس بسبب ما يجري، بل لأسباب تتصل بالمصالح السياسية لهذه العواصم.
في هذا السياق، من المفيد التوقف جدياً عند المواقف الأخيرة الصادرة عن الولايات المتحدة الأميركية وفرنسا وألمانيا وإسرائيل، التي انتقلت من مرحلة المراقبة والتحليل إلى مرحلة الفعل. وهذه العواصم التي فعلت الأمر نفسه في ليبيا قبل أن تطلب من عربها، ومن قسم من منتفضي شرق ليبيا أن يناشدوها التدخل العسكري لمواجهة قوات النظام هناك، رغم أن الغرب لا يزال مرتبكاً حيال إعلان موقف واضح وحاسم من حكم الرئيس الأسد. وربما كان ذلك يعود مرة جديدة إلى أن هذا الغرب لديه أجندة مطالب، فإذا التزم بها الأسد، خرج الرؤساء ووزراء الخارجية والناطقون باسم الحكومات ليطلبوا من الشعب السوري مساعدة الرئيس في تنفيذ الإصلاحات، وليعلنوا رفضهم التدخل في الشؤون الداخلية السورية. وبما أن الأمر لن يحصل؛ لأنه يصعب على عاقل أن يتوقع قبولاً سورياً بالمطالب الغربية التي تعني فعلاً نهاية النظام، يجب توقع موجة جديدة من الضغط الغربي، وهذه الموجة الجديدة لن تقف عند حدود البيانات والتصريحات، بل ستلامس في المرحلة الأولى سقف العقوبات، وهي التي تكون تمهيداً لمستوى آخر يهدف إلى العزل، وربما بعدها إلى شيء آخر، علماً بأن من الأفضل للمراهنين على تدخل خارجي في سوريا التدقيق في مآل التدخل القائم في ليبيا حيث العجز عن تحقيق نتائج فعلية، ما جعل الغرب يقفز فوق التفويض المعطى له بالضغط على القذافي إلى مستوى العمل على التخلص منه بحجة أن العلاج يكون هكذا.
لكن الأهم هو الانتباه إلى تصريحات وزير حرب العدو إيهود باراك لجهة قوله إنه «ليس على إسرائيل أن تفزع؛ لأن العملية التي بدأت في سائر أرجاء الشرق الأوسط واعدة جداً وتبعث آمالاً على المدى البعيد».

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Israel fears its ‘Nakba’ in September 2011

Posted on April 12, 2011 by rehmat1|
 Last month, Zionist entity’s defense minister Ehud Barak speaking at the International Security Studies Institute in Tel Aviv, warned his audience: “We are facing a political tsunami of which most members of the public are unaware. There is an international movement which will recognize a Palestinian state on 1967 borders. It would be wrong to ignore this tsunami. Israel’s de-legitimization is in sight. It’s very dangerous and requires action”.

Ehud Barak was referring to the coming annual session of United Nations General Assembly in New York in September 2011. The Palestinian Authority under control of Fatah President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to table a motion for the World Body’s recognition of an independent Palestinian State within 1967 borders (Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem).

Washington did not see any problem with the head of European Jewish terrorist groups, David Ben Gurion’s unilaterally declaration of State of Israel on May 14, 1948. But now, Obama’s Zionist Jew adviser, Dennis Ross, has advised Palestinian factions to negotiate Palestinian state status with the Zionist regime instead of taking some unilaterally action and asking for United Nations’ recognitition. This was meant to be a warning that Washington will use its veto power to block any such move.

Interestingly, Yossi Sarid wrote in Israeli daily Ha’aretz on November 13, 2009 that Mahmoud Abbas has historical right to declare Palestinian state unilaterally as “Ben Gurion would not have begrudged such a pretty act of plagiarim from his declaration of independence”.

“For 42 years Israel has been scattering prior conditions and faits accomplis all over, marking them with red tile roofs and making the peace process into nothing more than a never-ending process. before Abu Mazen quits, he has just one more job to do: He must declare, unilaterally, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. Palestine now,” wrote Yossi.

However, if PA declares a Palestinian statehood before the UN Assembly session in September, its action cannot be called a ’unilaterally declaration’ – as over 100 countries have endorsed the Palestinians’ 1988 declaration of independent statehood. Among them, several Latin American countries, such as Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela, have recognized an independent Palestinian state.

The would be reaction of the Zionist regime to Palestinian declaration of a statehood can be judged by Ethan Bronner, the New York Times correspondent in Jerusalem who last week cited a senior Israeli official who said: “The world thinks that it will force Israel to recognize the 1967 borders and the division of Jerusalem as a basis for negotiations? That will never happen.”

The Zionist regime’s claim that United Nations partitioned British mandated Palestine is nothing but one of many lies on which the Zionist entity has claimed its legitimacy. The fact of the matter is, Ben Gurion had unilaterally declared the creation of Israel on May 14, 1948 without prior recognition of a single member of United Nations. After Ben Gurion’s declaration United States became the first country to recognize the new state created on land stolen from its natives. A few hours later, USSR also recognized the Zionist entity.

Mahmoud Abbas has no mandate from Palestinians to make any such declaration. His mandate expired in January 2009. Now, the only democratically elected body in occupied Palestine is Hamas, which has the constitutional right to declare an independent State of Palestine, whenever it choses to do.

Abbas’s action will only provide Zionist-regime an excuse to carry-out another massacre of 1.5 million Palestinian traped inside tiny Gaza Strip. It’s something Abbas wanted Jewish army to do during its 2008 ‘Operation Cast Lead’. In reality, both Israel and Abbas want to see an end to the Islamic Resistance Hamas, so that Fatah can throw Palestinians to the dogs.

Palestinian remember the creation of state of Israel by the western colonial powers on May 14, 1948 – as al-Nakba (Cataclysm).

EHUD BARAK :Israel must advance peace or face a ‘diplomatic tsunami’


March 15, 2011 posted by Veterans Today ·
Editors Note:

Interesting statements from former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, now the current Defense Minister in the Israeli government. Barak seems to have a facility for identifying and describing the key issues of the Israeli problem….but, he seems to be incapable of identifying or defining any totally just settlement for them.
He and his Israeli cohorts simply cannot have their cake and eat it, too!  Any just solution must take into account that which is just to the victims of Israeli invasions and aggression. Simply removing or undoing  a few of the most recent injustices is insufficient.
His seemingly “generous” concessions are not concessions at all, and they are insultingly inadequate facsimiles of  ”Justice”…. meaningless diversions from the reality of what is happening, and what Israel is actually offering…. to wit,… nothing!

Defense Minister says Israel must counter building

international pressure to recognize a Palestinian state within 1967 borders.

By Barak Ravid / Haaretz

Ehud Barak at the INSS, Tel Aviv, March, 2011

Israel could face a diplomatic tsunami if the standstill in Mideast peace talks continues, Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Sunday, adding that a massive campaign to delegitimize Israel was at hand.

Direct peace talks that began in Washington in September of last year froze within weeks as a result of a disagreement between Israel and the Palestinians over a partial moratorium on construction in Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

At the time Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said peace was achievable in one year.

Speaking at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv on Sunday, Barak said that as that September deadline nears “we stand to face a diplomatic tsunami that the majority of the public is unaware of,” Barak said, adding that there was “an international movement that may recognize a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.”

“It’s a mistake not to notice this tsunami. Israel’s delegitimization is in sight, even if citizens don’t see it. It is a very dangerous situation, one that requires action,” the defense minister said, adding that “diplomatic initiative” would “reduce risks down the road.”

Barak also leveled what could be construed as indirect criticism of the diplomatic policy of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that “for the last two years we haven’t tried to put the core issues on the [negotiations’] table.”

“Israel must say it is willing to discuss security borders, refugees, and Jerusalem and then it could have a chance,” the defense minister said, adding that in the event that this initiative would fail, then “the other side would take the blame.”

The defense minister also called on opposition leader and Kadima chairperson Tzipi Livni to join the cabinet immediately in order to promote the peace process. According to Barak, “an election at this point is a bad option.”

The defense minister said that “Kadima must join the government and this should be a first priority.” Barak acknowledged that Kadima, the current opposition party, joining the government was no simple matter, with many of Livni’s advisors urging her to take an outsider’s look before deciding whether to join the government.

Barak stressed that worst case scenario, if no progress was made by the September deadline, Kadima could leave the government and call for reelections, however, he said that in the event that elections are called, it is the citizens that will pay the price.

Barak said that “elections are a time of collective stupidity. People stop doing what is good for the state and do whatever will get them more votes.”

Barak added that “the public is waiting to move forward. I say this every time to Netanyahu: ‘Don’t consult with the ministers, lead.’ We need to be decisive right now, both with those who stand with us as well as the opposition.”

Barak criticized Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman’s interim plan, saying that “these are just pipe dreams.” He added that “even if we are discussing an interim solution, it has to include a permanent future solution.” News about Israel, Palestine and the Middle East.

Source: Haaretz
River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

"..Hezbollah remembers the heavy beating they suffered from us in 2006 & you may be called to enter Lebanon again .."


Via Friday-Lunch-Club

“…Hezbollah remembers the heavy beating they suffered from us in 2006, but it is not forever, and you may be called to enter [Lebanon] again,” Barak told the IDF soldiers..”

Posted by G, Z, or B at 11:58 AM
<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: