Quantcast
Channel: Respect: SALAM ALQUDS ALAYKUM – سلام القدس عليكم
Viewing all 27504 articles
Browse latest View live

Syria: Jihadist factions close to civil war

$
0
0


Rebel fighters make their way through a yard in the village of Morek, in the countryside of the Syrian city of Hama, on March 7, 2014. (Photo: AFP-Ali Nasser)
Published Saturday, March 8, 2014
Tensions continue to escalate between jihadist factions in Syria. Spokesman of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Abu Mohammed al-Adnani released a threatening audio message yesterday, titled “We invoke Allah to curse the liars.” Meanwhile, al-Nusra Front sources told Al-Akhbar that they will retaliate on the “battlefields of jihad.”
Yesterday, it appeared as if Syria was on the verge of a new stage of conflict between jihadi factions, one that is expected to escalate full to a “jihadist civil war” between ISIS on one side and al-Nusra Front and the Islamic Front on the other.


The first signs of this impending civil war appeared in ISIS spokesman Mohammed al-Adnani’s audio message. He tried to entice jihadists by addressing “all those who seek jihad in the name of Allah… all those who got confused, who are now lost and fearing sedition and seeking reason, and those who consider stopping, backing down or staying neutral.”
Though his message sounded rather calm, it in fact clearly carried direct threats against all those who stand against ISIS. He described al-Nusra Front as the “Deception and Betrayal Front.” He also slammed the Islamic Front, describing it as “the Harm and al-Saud Front (referring to the al-Saud family that rules Saudi Arabia). Al-Adnani also stressed ISIS’s hostility toward the United States and the West, saying: “there is no other country on earth that has united all infidel forces against ISIS.”
Al-Adnani implicitly called upon jihadists to join ISIS, saying “oh people seeking righteous… how could you join the ranks of Salim Idriss the devil, or al-Jarba party, or even Jamal Maarouf’s militias and others supported by the Saudis, America and the infidels of the West.”
He also addressed the muhajirin- foreign fighters in Syria- saying “Oh muhajirin still fighting along with other the factions. Look around you to see how many other foreign fighters have remained with you,” calling upon al-Ansar- Syrian jihadists- to follow in the footsteps of the muhajirin saying: “oh Ansar follow the example of the muhajirin, they are the security valve of every battlefield of jihad.”
Al-Adnani reiterated that it wasn’t ISIS that started the fighting between jihadist groups, claiming that “accusations against it are void,” and threatening all those “who don’t fear Allah’s wrath and they that dare to attack us.”
He appeared even more threatening when speaking about “the fake claims that the ISIS refused to follow sharia,” presenting many examples when ISIS accepted verdicts issued by the joint tribunals. However, he stressed that tribunals invoked by al-Nusra Front are unacceptable. “Maybe their first ruling would be that ISIS leaves Syria and give up the land to thieves and traitors,” al- Adnani said, adding, “that’s something that would call for hitting heads, breaking necks, and splitting open abdomens.”
He also slammed the initiative of Saudi Sheikh Abdullah al-Mouhaysini who was recently injured in the head after joining the ranks of the Islamic Front in the industrial district in the Sheikh Najjar region in Aleppo.
While al-Adnani ignored the threats of al-Nusra Front chief, Abu Mohammed al-Golani, he insisted on responding to Abu Abdullah al-Shami, known as the “al-Nusra judge,” and a member of its Shura council. He called him a liar and called upon him to resort to mubahala (an Islamic tradition where two opposing sides mutually pray for the truth).
Al-Adnani denied that ISIS accepted to mubahala, referring its dispute with al-Nusra Front to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. According to a jihadi source speaking to Al-Akhbar“al-Adnani’s message is a proof of ISIS’s incapacity to confront others. It is crumbling to the point that it is now seeking pity from other jihadists.”
“The call to mubahala is an attempt to escape confrontation but our retaliation will only hit them on the battlefield,” the source affiliated with al-Nusra Front said. Sources close to the Islamic Front refused to comment.
Meanwhile, a Chechen source affiliated with ISIS said, “the most important part of Sheikh al-Adnani’s message was he slammed al-Golani, not al-Nusra Front. We are the true fighters of al-Nusra Front, the group sent by Emir Abu Baker to Syria and integrated within the Islamic State. It is now time to put matters into perspective.”


ISIS supporters celebrated al-Adnani’s message over Twitter, the main social media platform used by jihadists. Abu Mouaz al-Shari, an ISIS judge, summed up al-Adnani’s speech saying, “The army, the military council, the National Coalition and the National Council… they all side with America in an attempt to destroy the Islamic project.” Al-Nusra affiliates, along with its sheikhs and judges, mocked the message and considered it laughable.
Who is al-Adnani?
His real name in thought to be Taha Sobhi Falaha and was born in 1977 in Banash, a village in Aleppo’s countryside. He was first the spokesman of ISIS and was later appointed an emir over the Levant.
According to jihadi sources “Sheikh al-Adnani was among the first foreign fighters in Iraq when the American campaign began. He is also a member of the Shura al-Mujahidin Council.
The Multi-National Forces arrested al-Adnani at Iraq’s al-Anbar in May 2005 under his fake name “Yasser Khalaf Hussein Nazal al-Rawi” and was released in 2010.
An Iraqi intelligence official said back in December 2012 that al-Adnani is currently using a number of aliases including “Abu Mohamed al-Adnani, Taha al-Banshi, Jaber Taha Falah, Abu Baker al-Khatab and Abu Sadek al-Rawi.”
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Franklin Lamb: Introducing the Syria Resistance (PFLI) and it's Leader

$
0
0

ED NOTE: Thanks to our friend Dr. Franklin Lamb for introducing the Syrian resistance and its Leader Ali Kayali fighting in all fronts, shoulder to shoulder with the Syrian Arab Army,  the takfirs sponsored by the zionists world order and its tools Saudia, Qatar, Turkey and the So-called March 14 movement. The resistance will continue until full liberation of Syrian Land, including south Syria (Palestine) and every inch of Syrian Land occupied by Turkey.

I added some pictures and the videos



------



----



------



----


North of Latakia, Syria
Posted on 
http://www.iskenderun.org/Fotogaleri/Sahil/iskenderun_sahil013.jpg
Every school kid here in Syria learns at an early age about the various colonial land grabs that have lopped off key parts of their ancient country, and they receive instruction about their national duty to recover this sacred territory. The concept applies equally to still-occupied Palestine, or at least it did before the 2011 uprising got started, albeit since then a degree of resentment has arisen over participation by some Palestinians with rebel groups seeking to topple the Syrian government.
http://i.imgur.com/COy9D.jpg
Be that as it may, one such land grab historically remembered, and which is currently galvanizing resistance on behalf of Syria, is that of Iskenderun, north of Latakia, in a disputed Syria-Turkish border area. As Turkish, Saudi, and Qatari-sponsored jihadists continue to enter the country, well worth remembering is it that Iskenderun is rich in natural resources and that for thousands of years it was part of Syria. But that status changed more than half a century ago when France cut it off from Syria and grafted it onto Turkey—and now some pro-government militias are fighting to get it back.
iskmap
The name derives from Alexander the Great, who around 333 BC encamped in the area and ordered a city be built, although the exact site of the historic city is subject to dispute. At any rate, the strategic importance of Iskenderun comes from its geographical relation to Syrian Gates, the easiest approach to the open ground of Hatay Province and Aleppo, and the dispute over it has been heating up recently, partly as a result of the current crisis.
It all started on July 5, 1938, when Turkish forces under Colonel Sukril Kanath launched an aggression, with French approval, and ethnically cleansed the local Armenian Christian and Allawi populations. The Turkish invasion was enabled by the French, partners with Britain in Sykes-Picot, who had remained as illegal occupiers of Syria, a holdover from the League of Nations mandate. The French were complicit in a rigged referendum, essentially ceding to Turkey this Syrian territory, which by then was referred to as the Republic of Hatay. It was a land grab. Pure and simple. And it was part of a secret deal to secure Turkey’s help with the fast approaching war with Germany. Paris and Ankara struck a deal: Turkey, while not joining the allies against Germany, declared neutrality and essentially sat out World War II.
frankandali
Commander Ali Kayali, of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Iskenderun
Syria, rather than being expansionist, as it is sometimes accused of by Turkey and the Zionist regime, has actually been losing territory, not gaining it.“We lost northern Palestine in 1918, Lebanon in 1920, and the Iskenderun area through French duplicity,” said a retired diplomat here.“Surely Lebanon must also be returned to Syria. It was never a real country and it never will be as far as I am concerned. It is part of Syria!”Indeed, as Robert Fisk points out, after the First World War, most Lebanese wished their land to remain part of Syria (see the results of the King-Crane Commission) rather than live in a separate “nation” under French domination. As we parted, the gentleman shook my hand and declared: “Of course Iskendurun is part of Syria. No honest person can deny this!”
Enter one remarkable Syrian nationalist, Ali Kayali, aka “Abu Zaki”. So how did a polite gentleman from this region of Turkish-occupied Syria end up leading one of the most effective resistance militias in the northern theater in the current Syrian crisis? Basically he did it the same way as untold numbers of Palestinians supporting young Syrian men during the early 1980’s. 
Ali went to Beirut to resist the 1982 Zionist aggression. There he was baptized by fire, so to speak, carrying the banner of his new group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Iskenderun (PFLI) under the tutelage of Dr. George Habash and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). 

Ali fought in a number of south Lebanon fronts, and also inside West Beirut, but then after the PLO withdrawal (on 8/20/82), he returned to Syria, to Tartous, joining the rebellion against PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. Near Bedwari camp he fought, as part of the Fatah Intifada uprising, this following the PLO split along -pro-Arafat and pro-Hafez Assad cleavages.

Later, Ali undertook study on his own in Tartous (Tripoli, Syria), and at one point escaped from prison in Turkey where he had been jailed for demonstrating against the fascist regime in Ankara. Returning to Syria, he joined Syrian Army battles against the Bilal Shaaban-led Al Tawhid Islamic (Muslim Brotherhood ), following which he and the PFLI moved to the area of Halba in Akkar, Lebanon, and organized a resistance training camp. Eventually, however, he returned to Syria to continue the fight to liberate the Syrian territory of Iskenderun, and while supported by Syrian citizens, the Kayali-led group was not formally part of the Syrian security/resistance apparatus.
pflipositions

Commander Ali discussing PFLI positions
Speaking with non-government analysts in Latkia, this observer was repeatedly told that the PFLI has the reputation of understanding the geography and politics of the Syrian coast area where its fighters are currently active, including Aleppo, Banias, between Tartous and the countryside around Latakia, as well as the Idlib, Homs and Damascus areas.



As PFLI fighters and officials put it, “Syria will not kneel to the Zionist-Arab project to destroy the unity and independence of the Syrian Arab Republic.” According to one PFLI spokesperson, the group “supports and stands in the same trench, hand in hand with the state, confronting two foreign projects—the first being to destroy the achievements of the Syrian people and Syria’s social fabric and multi-cultural heritage, and the second being to infiltrate foreign intruders.”



One place the PFLI is currently fighting is the strategic rebel bastion of Yabrud, in the Qalamoun Mountains, north of Damascus, near the Lebanese border. On 3/3/14, during a meeting with this observer and some of his associates, Ali Kyali received a phone call relaying information that Sahel village, about four miles from Yabrud, had come under control of Syrian and pro-Syrian forces, including the PFLI. Remarkably open with battlefield details, Ali explained that pro-Syria forces do not want to occupy Yabrud, but rather the strategy is to control the villages surrounding it in order to trap al Nursa and other rebel militia inside. Asked about the trapped local population and reminded of the fate of the inner city populations of Aleppo, Homs and a dozen other locations, Ali shrugged and turned up his palms.
Today (3/7/14) the PFLI is fighting to try to cut off the road linking Yabrud to Arsal in eastern Lebanon, whose majority population supports the Syrian revolt. PFIL fighters were involved last week with the fall of Al-Sahl, a town a little over a mile south of Yabrud, and now are fighting in and around Yaboud, preparing for the anticipated final assault. According to Ali’s personal bodyguards, they are facing Al-Qaida’s Syria affiliate, al-Nusra Front. Some of PFLI’s 3000 troops are also fighting this week in Douma, Jobar, Aleppo, the countryside around Lattakia, and Deralcia near Nubek on the main Damascus-Homs highway. They also played a key role earlier in Baniyas, in the battle between Tartous and Latakia. One YouTube clip being given to visitors to the PFLI HQ in Latakia shows the group’s participation, including women, in a recent important battle against the ISIS: 
The PFLI organization receives a variety of random and sporadic support from the local community, according to Mr. Kayali and his staff, but they, like most militia, need money and weapons and regular supplies of food. Also needed are places for the fighters to sleep, as well as more uniforms to accommodate a sharp influx of applicants seeking to join their ranks. Additionally there is the matter of funding death benefit payments for the families of PFLI men and women killed during resistance.


PFLI fighters are not paid salaries, which sets them apart financially from many Gulf-backed and Western-trained militia, who can garner monthly salaries from $500-$1,000. By contrast, pro-government popular committees, numbering approximately 5,000, and National Defense units, whose fighters number around 25,000, receive approximately 20,000 Syrian Pounds, or $126 a month. Footing much of this bill are Syrian businessmen such as Rami Mahlouf, cousin of President Bashar Assad. Regular Syrian army recruits get only 3000 Syrian pounds, or about $20 monthly, but they also receive food and lodging and health and travel benefits. Syrian army reservists are said to receive approximately $10.50 per month.
jofa
“Joan of Arc” with part of her resistance family
For Ali Kayali, the PFLI is also a family matter. His wife and daughter and two sons are deeply connected with its resistance goals. His sons are fighters, as are his wife and daughter when called upon, though in-between time they do other resistance projects. Nicked-named “Joan of Arc,” his 22-year-old daughter attends medical school, but reportedly is also a ferocious fighter and adept battlefield tactician, with dramatic results in a number of battles against rebels over the past nearly two years. She is a strong, no-nonsense feminist and told me she loves to shock takfiris, who sometimes appear amazed to see her and her female unit chasing them up the side of some mountain.
It is said that an army (or a militia, for that matter) travels on its stomach. This observer was treated to an impromptu roadside lunch with half a dozen PFLI fighters last week. Their favorite cook, Mahmoud, a small guy who always seems to wear the same blue shirt, invited us. Within minutes, Mahmoud gathered some twigs and small chunks of wood, lit a small fire, covered it with a metal grate, grabbed a bag of flour, mixed in water, kneaded it a bit, and shaped and roasted some small, irregular round loaves. On these he sprinkled, from another plastic bag, some handfuls of spices. His fast and hot food was delicious, constituting Mhamra manouche (roasted pita bread with spicy red pepper sauce), Zaatar  manouche (oregano, thyme, & sesame seeds), and Jibneh (cheese) manouche.
Captagon Jihad?


Sitting in the lobby of a run-down, less-than-one-star, dockside hotel opposite the Mediterranean, a lodging establishment occasionally used as quarters by various militia, this observer and his companion spoke leisurely one early morning with one of Ali Kyali’s sons and a companion. When not fighting jihadists (in “Have AK-47, Will Travel”-mode), they are among his father’s bodyguards. I have for a while been interested in claims by Western governments that they are supplying “humanitarian non-lethal aid” to rebel groups, including night goggles, telecommunication equipment, and GPS devices. This observer views all such equipment as misnamed and indeed lethal inasmuch as they facilitate one side killing the other via night snipers or through expedition of troop movements. I was a bit surprised to learn what PFLI fighters thought of this kind of equipment being given to their adversaries and labeled ‘humanitarian aid.’
“Not having night goggles, except for some we take off the enemy, is not much of a problem for us because we can sense where al Nusra fighters are, and they tend not to fight at night,” Ali’s son told me.
I asked why the reluctance to fight at night, thinking maybe it had something to do with a religious edict of some sort, but once more I was mistaken.
“No it’s not that, it’s because they are too paranoid and exhausted, from taking captagon and even stronger drugs, to fight at night.”

According the guys I was sitting with, some with more than two years fighting experience with the PFLI, many, if not most, of the Gulf-sponsored jihadists are given bags of pills to enhance their battlefield courage. And it works to a degree. At dawn each day, jihadists take drugs, including large doses of captagon and other widely available drugs. There also are some particularly potent drugs, known locally as “baltcon,” “afoun,” and ”zolm,” as well as opium, heroin, cocaine, and hashish. The main drug routes into the Syrian battle zones, I was advised, run from Pakistan, Afghanistan and Lebanon, with lesser amounts coming via Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. Lebanon’s Bekaa valley apparently produces large amounts of captagon pills for shipment to the Gulf, and now to Syria. Jihadists high on drugs apparently feel invincible, and hostile, and do not fear death. Many are indeed ferocious and fearless fighters during the day, as many media sources have reported. But by nightfall, when the drug wears off, the fighters become exhausted and sometimes are found asleep on the very scene of battle they were fighting from.



“Many of the ‘Gulfies’ are in fact heavily addicted to strong heroin-like drugs. They crave them, and sometimes they even fight with their fellow militiamen to get their ‘fixes.’ We are told by some we capture that sometimes, when one of their comrades is killed, the fallen fighter’s ‘friends’ will descend on his body, not particularly to pray over it, but to rummage his pockets for his drugs.”

In point of fact, in 2011 alone, Lebanese authorities confiscated three amphetamine production labs, in addition to two Captagon-producing labs, which they claim were responsible for sending hundreds of thousands of the pills to the Gulf. The seizure of trucks with captagon in their chassis in Lebanon, and at Beirut airport, shows a growing demand for these products in the Syrian militia market. The UN recently reported that the Middle and Near East are experiencing the majority of drug busts globally.
Al Nusra Front and ISIS—being some of the more extreme “imported jihadists,” as some here call them—claim to be better fighters than Hezbollah, whose units set the fighting skill bar fairly high these days. Some of them claim they have not really started their battle to defeat Hezbollah on its own territory, but will do so when they are ready. But as one PFLI fighter explained, and some of his buddies nodded agreement, only when high on drugs do Qatari/Saudi jihadists exhibit bravery and bravado. Only then do they pose a serious threat, because they ignore normal defensive fighting tactics.
“We know many of these guys quite well. Lots of them were never even religious. There are many who are drug addicts, who get high and lose their fear of dying, so they are dangerous to confront, and they often use strange tactics.”
According to another PFLI source, the “imported Jihadists” die in high numbers because they ignore the battlefield realities. Their average number of dead in any given firefight over the past two years is estimated to be approximately five times the number of Hezbollah casualties, three times the number of PFLI fighters, and twice the number of casualties than the regular Syrian army.
As the Syrian crisis enters its fourth year, with more jihadists arriving and more militia being formed across the political and religious spectrum, the US intelligence community and congressional sources are now predicting the war will continue for another decade or more. It’s anyone’s guess what the post-Syrian crisis period will bring to this region given the rise of ethno-nationalism along with demands for the return of Sykes-Picot land grabs. There are also growing signs of a cataclysmic intifada in Palestine. When you add to all that US intelligence predictions of the overthrow of two, and possibly three, Gulf monarchies, another Hezbollah-Zionist war, plus the deterioration of the social and religious fabric across the region, the future looks bleak indeed.
Franklin Lamb is a visiting Professor of International Law at the Faculty of Law, Damascus University and volunteers with the Sabra-Shatila Scholarship Program (sssp-lb.com).

Syria: al-Zara in Homs Countryside Liberated

$
0
0
ما هي أهمية تحرير الزارة وتداعياته على المسلحين في الشمال و المناطق الحدودية ؟
Posted by: Arabi Souri

The strategic al-Zara town is liberated. The shock-waves that will follow will be huge, not to the level of liberating Qussayr, but to a very large extent. al-Zara is a very important town supporting terrorists fortifying in al-Hosn Castle (Krak des Chevaliers), and threatening the main Homs – Tartous highway.
Syrian Arab Army forces SAA, in cooperation with the local National Defense Forces, NDF, managed to storm the town from several axes after early morning fierce clashes, and reached the heart of the town swiftly eliminating all terrorists remnants.
al Zara Hosn Homs Syria: al Zara Liberated
al-Zara town liberated by SAA & NDF in Homs western countryside
Terrorists from Nusra Front & Jund ul-Cham were the main forces in the town and most fled to al-Hosn Castle. The two groups fighting the Syrian Arab Army and slaughtering the Syrian people are affiliated with Al-Qaeda publicly, one of them at least is listed on the US list of terrorist organizations (Nusra Front) but still receive all types of aid, weapons, finance, food and logistics from the US & its regional allies..!
By restoring al-Zara and cornering the terrorists in the historical citadel, the SAA has cut the main supply routes for the terrorists from infested with anti-Islamic Wahhabi terrorists Lebanon.
Our observation of the SAA movements indicate the Army will starve the terrorists in the citadel to surrender avoiding to attack it to maintain its structure but we’re not much sure about the reactions of the Obama regime backed suicide bombers inside it.
The following report by Lebanese TV station al-Manar with English subtitles tells more, the station is also banned like all the Syrian based media by the ‘free speech promoters’ hypocrites in the west, namely the USA & European Union:


News from the Syrian battlefields between the Syrian people and their armed forces on one side and the terrorists from Al-Qaeda groups and all its different names on the other side are causing panic in the anti-Syrian camp, led internationally by the United States regime of Barack Obama, and his minions in the region mainly the Al Saud of Arabia and the Muslim Brotherhood AKP ruling party of Turkey. Wait and see.
Krak des chevaliers Syria: al Zara Liberated
Krak des Chevaliers now occupied by US backed al-Qaeda terrorist groups

Syrian Army Regains Control over Zara in Homs Countryside
Local Editor

The Syrian army regained control over the town of Zara
Syrian Armyin Homs western countryside, Al-Manar reporter confirmed.

Units of the army also clashed with an armed terrorist group which was trying to attack a number of military checkpoints in the towns of Daraa.

A military source told SANA that the army confronted terrorist groups which were attempting to attack several military points in central prison, Ziraa of Daraa al-Balad, killing many of terrorists and destroying their criminal equipment and vehicles.

The source added another army unit eliminated members of an armed group in the surrounding of the water treasurer in Ataman, Daraa countryside, killing a number of terrorists.

Units of the Syrian Arab Army destroyed dens of armed terrorist groups in several neighborhoods and towns of Aleppo and eliminated tens of gunmen and injured others.

A military source told SANA reporter that units of the army eliminated tens of terrorist and injured others in al-Sakkari, Bani Zaid, Bustan al-Qaser and al-Jandoul roundabout.

The source added that the army units eliminated many terrorists in Kweiris, Rasm al-Abboud, Arbid, Jdeideh, Khan Touman, al-Hajib, the industrial city, al-Bureij and the surrounding of Aleppo central prison.

Source: Websites
08-03-2014 - 15:16 Last updated 08-03-2014

Related Articles

Weekly Report on Israel’s Terrorism against the State of Palestine

$
0
0
FULL REPORT
Israeli forces seized construction materials and detained construction workers in an under-construction building that will be used as kindergarten in Yatta village in Hebron.
Israeli forces continue systematic attacks against Palestinian civilians and property in the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt)
      
 Palestinian member of an armed group was killed in the West Bank.
 2 members of armed groups were killed and 2 children were wounded in an airstrike.
 Israeli forces continued to open fire at border areas in the Gaza Strip.
Israeli forces killed a woman with mental disorder, south of the Gaza Strip.
a Palestinian civilian was wounded in the northern Gaza Strip.
 Israeli forces continued to use excessive force against peaceful protesters in the West Bank.
4 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were wounded in Bil'in protest.
12 civilians were wounded in other protests in the West Bank, including 4 children.
 Israeli forces conducted 83 incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank.
 48 civilians, including 4 children were arrested.
Israel continued to impose a total closure on the oPt and has isolated the Gaza Strip from the outside world.
Israeli forces established dozens of checkpoints in the West Bank.
At least 3 Palestinian civilians, including a 10-year-old child, were arrested at checkpoints in the West Bank.
3 Palestinian civilians, including a child, were arrested, north of the Gaza Strip

Israeli navy forces continued targeting Palestinian fishermen in the sea.
 Israeli forces continued to support settlement activities in the West Bank and Israeli settlers continued to attack Palestinian civilians and property.
Settlers cut off 400 olive seedlings, north of the West Bank.
Fire was set to a house in Selwad village, northeast of Ramallah.
  
Summary

 Israeli violations of international law and international humanitarian law in the oPt continued during the reporting period (27 February – 05 March 2014).

Shooting:

 During the reporting period, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian woman suffering from mental disorder in the Gaza Strip and 3 members of armed groups, 2 of whom in the Gaza Strip and one in the West Bank. Moreover, Israeli forces wounded 19 Palestinian civilians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, including 7 children. Three of whom were wounded in the Gaza Strip and the 16 others were wounded in the West Bank. Israeli forces carried out 2 airstrikes, 3 shooting incidents along the border fence between the Gaza Strip and Israel and one shooting incident against Palestinian fishing boats.

In the Gaza Strip, on 28 February 2014, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian woman suffering from a mental disorder when they opened fire at her, as she approached the border fence, east of Abassan village, east of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip. The woman bled to death was found the following day. Her brother said to PCHR's fieldworker that the diseased had been suffering from a mental disorder for 15 years. She went out to attend a wedding party of a family member near her house in Khuza'a village, east of Khan Yunis. She lost her way and approached the border fence, east of Khuza'a village, when Israeli forces shot her.

 On 04 March 2014, Israeli forces killed two members of armed groups and wounded two children in Beit Hanoun village, north of the Gaza Strip. One of the children sustained serious wounds.

 On 28 February 2014, a Palestinian civilian was wounded when Israeli forces stationed along the border fence, east of Jabalia village, north of the Gaza Strip opened fire at a group of youngsters, who were a few meters away from the fence.
 On the same day, Israeli forces opened fire at a number of youngsters in Abassan village, east of Khan Yunis, in the southern Gaza Strip, when they protested near the border fence. No casualties were reported.

 Also on the same day, an Israeli drone fired a missile at open land in Beit Hanoun village, north of the Gaza Strip. Residents of the area were frightened, but no casualties were reported.

On 01 March 2014, Israeli gunboats stationed off the shore northwest of Beit Lahia, in the northern Gaza Strip, opened fire at fishing boats sailing within 3 nautical miles.

 In the West Bank, on 27 February 2014, Israeli forces killed a Palestinian in Birzait village, north of Ramallah, after surrounding his family house for hours.
 In the same context, Israeli forces used excessive force against peaceful demonstrations organised by Palestinian civilians, international and Israeli human rights defenders in protest at the construction of the annexation wall and settlement activities in the West Bank. As a result, 4 civilians, including a child, were wounded during Bil'in weekly protest.

 In the same context, on 28 February 2014, 12 Palestinian civilians, including 4 children, were wounded during peaceful demonstrations organized at the entrance of al-Jalazoun refugee camp, north of Ramallah; and the eastern entrance of Birzait village, north of Ramallah.

Incursions:
 During the reporting period, Israeli forces conducted at least 83 military incursions into Palestinian communities in the West Bank. During these incursions, Israeli forces arrested at least 48 Palestinians, including 4 children.

Restrictions on movement:

 Israel continued to impose a tight closure of the oPt, imposing severe restrictions on the movement of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem.

 The illegal closure of the Gaza Strip, which has steadily tightened since June 2007 has had a disastrous impact on the humanitarian and economic situation in the Gaza Strip.  The Israeli authorities impose measures to undermine the freedom of trade, including the basic needs for the Gaza Strip population and the agricultural and industrial products to be exported. For 7 consecutive years, Israel has tightened the land and naval closure to isolate the Gaza Strip from the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, and other countries around the world. This resulted in grave violations of the economic, social and cultural rights and a deterioration of living conditions for 1.7 million people.  The Israeli authorities have established Karm Abu Salem (Kerem Shaloum) as the sole crossing for imports and exports in order to exercise its control over the Gaza Strip’s economy.  They also aim at imposing a complete ban on the Gaza Strip’s exports.

 Israeli forces have continued to impose severe restrictions on the movement of Palestinian civilians throughout the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem. Thousands of Palestinian civilians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip continue to be denied access to Jerusalem.

 As part of using military checkpoints and border crossings as traps to arrest Palestinian civilians under the pretext they are wanted, Israeli forces arrested at least 2 civilians in the West Bank.

 Settlement activities

 Israel has continued its settlement activities in the oPt, a direct violation of international humanitarian law, and Israeli settlers have continued to attack Palestinian civilians and property.

 Attacks carried out by Israeli forces

 On 28 February 2014, Israeli forces moved into the agricultural lands surrounding “Beit ‘Ein” settlement established on Palestinian lands confiscated from the northwest of Beit Ummar village, north of Hebron.  Israeli forces forced ‘Abdel Hamid al-Sleibi (78) and his sons to leave their land in Abu al-Rish Valley area, west of the village, claiming that they are confiscated lands.  The Israeli soldiers threatened him that he will arrest him in case their orders were not obeyed.
 On 02 March 2014, Israeli forces backed by military vehicles and a winch truck and accompanied by a vehicle from the Construction and Organization Department in the Israeli Civil Administration moved into al-Tawani area, east of Yatta, south of Hebron.  They stationed near an under-construction building to be used as a kindergarten.  The Israeli soldiers detained Construction workers, and the Civil Administration confiscated a concrete mixer and other construction materials under the pretext of having no construction permit.

Attacks carried out by settlers

 On 27 February 2014, 6 settlers from “’Ofrah” settlement established on the lands of the villages of Silwad and ‘Ein Yabrud infiltrated into a house belonging to Rowaidah ‘Abdel Ghani Soliman Hammad (61) from Silwad village, northeast of Ramallah.  The settlers poured an incendiary material on the balcony and put it on fire.  As a result, the curtains, chairs and furniture in the balcony caught fire.  The settlers then wrote a slogan in Hebrew on a wall outside the house that says “Qasrah, Get out Arabs.”

 On 28 February 2014, a group of settlers from “Yitshar” settlement attacked Palestinian farmers, who were pruning olive trees in Al-Lohof area “al-Bayadat”, west of Hawarah village, south of Nablus.  Settlers used metal tubes as weapons.  As a result, the farmers sustained different wounds and were taken to Rafidiah Surgical Hospital in Nablus to received medical treatment.

 On 02 March 2014, settlers from “Har Heimed” outpost of “Kadomim” settlement uprooted 400 olive seedlings in the lands of Kafr Qadoum village, northeast of Qalqilya.  The attacked land belongs to Nazmi As’aad Qasem ‘Ebeid, who planted it this winter.

 On 03 March 2014, a group of settlers from “Halmish” settlement established on the lands of the villages of al-Nabi saleh and Deir Nizam, northwest of Ramallah, gathered on the main road near the settlement.  The settlers threw stones at Palestinian cars passing on the road leading to the villages of al-Nabi Saleh, Beit Rima, Deir Ghassanah, Kafer ‘Ein, the nearby Qarawet Bani Zaid and the eastern villages of Salfit.

Ron Paul: “US has no right to lecture on Ukraine because of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya” (Not to mention Syria)

$
0
0
Please note: Interview was recorded before Liz Wahl quitted RT America.


Ron Paul-2

The US, Russia and the European Union are all posturing with rhetoric about the crisis in Ukraine.

But in the US, critics say we should stay on the sidelines and let the interim Ukrainian government deal with their own issues.

One of those critics is former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas). 



He tells that he thinks the US is hypocritical for lecturing Russia for a violation of sovereignty.

Take a listen to what else the libertarian-leaning politician has to say about US involvement in Ukraine.

SFP  from  RT

C'mon baby, light my (Crimean) fire

$
0
0

By Pepe Escobar 

led by Prime Minister Arseniy "Yats" Yatsenyuk -  an Ukrainian Jewish banker playing the role of Western puppet

March 16 is C Day. The Crimean parliament - by 78 votes with 8 abstentions - decided this is the day when Crimean voters will choose between joining the Russian Federation or to remain part of Ukraine as an autonomous region with very strong powers, according to the 1992 constitution.

Whatever "diplomatic" tantrums Washington and Brussels will keep pulling, and they will be incandescent, facts on the ground speak for themselves. The city council of Sevastopol - the headquarters of Russia's Black Sea fleet -  has already voted to join Russia. And next week the Duma in Moscow will study a bill to simplify the mechanism of adhesion.

Quick recap: this is a direct result of Washington spending US$5 billion -  a Victoria "F**k the EU" Nuland official figure - to promote  regime change in Ukraine.  On the horizon, Crimea may be incorporated into Russia for free, while the "West" absorbs that bankrupt back-of-beyond (Western Ukraine) that an Asia Times Online reader indelibly described as the "Khaganate of Nulands" (an amalgam of khanate, Victoria's notorious neo-con husband Robert Kagan, and no man's land).  

What Moscow regards as an illegal, neo-nazi infiltrated government in Kiev, led by Prime Minister Arseniy "Yats" Yatsenyuk -  an Ukrainian Jewish banker playing the role of Western puppet -  insists Crimea must remain part of Ukraine. And it's not only Moscow; half of Ukraine itself does not recognize the Yats gang as a legitimate government, now boasting a number of oligarchs imposed as provincial governors. 

Yet this "government" -  supported by the US and the European Union  - has already declared the referendum illegal. Proving its impeccable "democratic" credentials, it has already moved to ban the official use of the Russian language in Ukraine; get rid of the communist party, which amassed 13% of the votes in the last election, more, incidentally, than the neo-nazi-infested Svoboda ("Freedom") party, now ensconced in key government security posts; and ban a Russian TV station, which happens to be the most popular on Ukrainian cable.

Amid all the hysteria from Washington and certain European capitals, what's not explained to puzzled public opinion is that these fascists/neo-nazis who got to power through a coup will never allow real elections to take place in Ukraine; after all they would most certainly be sent packing.

This implies that "Yats" and his gang -  on top of it reveling at their red carpet welcome at a pompous yet innocuous EU summit in Brussels - won't budge. For instance, they used heavy muscle to send pro-Russian protesters in front of the Donetsk government building running. Heavily industrialized Donetsk is very much linked commercially to Russia.  
Then there's an even more sinister possible scenario looming in the horizon; an instrumentalization of the lunatic jihadi fringe of the 10% of Tatars in Crimea, from false flags to suicide bombings. The House of Saud, according to a solid Saudi source, is immensely interested in Ukraine, and may be tempted to do a few favors for Western intelligence.  

Will our love become a funeral pyre?

Arguably, for Moscow, keeping Crimea inside the Ukraine, with large autonomous powers plus the current signed agreement to keep the base in Sevastopol, is a much better deal than annexing it. It's as if Russia was annexing what for all practical purposes was already a Russian province.

Yet the Kremlin may always decide not to annex, and use the all but certain result of the referendum as a key pawn in a complex negotiation with, not the EU, but fundamentally Germany. The EU is a mess. The "government" in Kiev is a mess. What matters is what Vladimir Putin is discussing over the phone with Angela Merkel.

Much has to do with Pipelineistan -  as in the 9 billion euro (US$12.4  billion) Nord Stream, the steel umbilical cord between Russia and Germany via the Baltic Sea. Merkel, the then Russian president Dmitri Medvedev, and former German chancellor and now Nord Stream chairman Gerhard Schroeder were very close when the pipeline project carrying Russian gas to Germany went online in 2011.  The project was initially proposed in 2005 when Schroeder was chancellor and Putin was Russia's president, first time round. Schroeder, earlier this week, said that NATO should shut up. 

Moreover, two-way trade between Russia and the EU was around a whopping US$370 billion in 2012 (no 2013 data yet), with Russia exporting mostly oil, gas and cereals, and the EU exporting mostly cars, medicine, machine parts. Forget about sanctions, that sacrosanct Washington mantra; they are really bad for business.
Moscow, though, has a real, tangible and very serious red line. It does not even have to bother about Ukraine in the EU  because the overwhelming majority of Europeans don't want it as part of their club. The red line is North Atlantic Treaty Organization bases in Ukraine. Moscow might even compromise on Ukraine remaining a sort of Finland between Russia and Europe. With Crimea still inside the Ukraine, a NATO base side by side with the Russian base in Sevastopol would be nothing short of psychedelic.

So a resolution in Crimea -  whichever way it goes -  does send a very clear message from Moscow to the "West". Watch our red line. And unlike others, we mean it, and we back it up with all we got.

No time to wallow in the mire First US President Barack Obama solemnly declared that the referendum in Crimea would "violate international law" (Kosovo, though, could merrily secede from Serbia in 2008, to wild Washington fanfare.)
And this after he declared Crimea to be an "extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the US". What next -  Crimean nationalists invading Iowa? No, just a ploy for the White House to deploy the usual financial war.
All that when the brilliant "strategy" of Team Obama -  keep demonizing Putin to Kingdom Come -  was reaching its apex.

But then Obama -  noticing Angela Merkel was stealing the spotlight - called Putin and stayed on the phone for nearly a full hour trying to "engage" him. Why the change of heart?

A possible response may be supplied by the inescapable Dr Zbigniew "The Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski, former national security advisor to that Hamlet hick Jimmy Carter; the man who gave the Soviets "their Vietnam"; the man who always dreamed that the US should rule over Eurasia; and Obama's "invisible" top foreign policy mentor.

As Dr Zbig told WorldPost's Nathan Gardels, "The strategy of the West at this moment should be to complicate Vladimir Putin's planning."  Well, that didn't work so well, did it?  Then Dr Zbig advances that "NATO should invite the Russians to participate in its ongoing discussions".  It's not happening.

Dr Zbig is adamant "we have to formally recognize the new government in Ukraine, which I believe expresses the will of the people there".  In fact, the will of perhaps half of the nation, at best. "Interference in Ukrainian affairs should be considered a hostile act by a foreign power." That was Obama's rationale until his phone call to Putin.
Dr Zbig got even more apocalyptic, stressing, "We should put NATO contingency plans into operation, deploying forces in Central Europe so we are in a position to respond if war should break out and spread." No wonder US corporate media went bananas.

But then Dr Zbig falls back into sanity; "The best solution for Ukraine would be to become as Finland has been to Russia." So in the end he may have suggested to Obama "a compromise solution that is acceptable for Russia as well as the West". And that will involve "serious economic aid and investment". And guess who should take the lead, as in footing the bill? "Germany, the most prosperous and strongest economy in the EU."

So in the end we fall back, once again, on what Angela and Vlad have been discussing. Is it Finlandization? Or is it about who's trying to set the night on fire?

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War(Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge(Nimble Books, 2007), and Obama does Globalistan(Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

(Copyright 2014 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

ALAIN SORAL AND GILAD ATZMON ON JEWISH POWER AND CULTURAL NARCISSISM

$
0
0


An Interview byAlimuddin Usmani 
Translated by Romain Redouin (http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr)
Alain Soral and Gilad Atzmon have each faced (and perhaps welcomed) criticism and controversy as a result of their intellectual inquiries  and honest reasoning. Neither man has shied away from politically incorrect observations including  those on issues of Zionism, culture, Europe or freedom of speech.
How  did you get to know each other?
 AS: I first got to know  Gilad through his  music. I am a jazz lover  and have long appreciated Gilad who is an internationally known and admired  musician. Gilad also played with Robert Wyatt who has been my favorite musician since I was 16. 

Gilad and I met in person two years ago at the Paris Book Fair. He was there to finalize the contract of his latest book, "The Wandering Who?" which is co-published by my publishing company, Kontre Kulture.
I am blown away by Gilad’s courage  and lucidity. By culture and experience I have seen that those Jews who are able to tear the veil of tribalism to reach the  authentic universal are very rare, although they are always the best!
GA: Soral published one of the two French editions of my latest book, "The Wandering Who." I met him at  the Paris book fair 2 years ago and in spite of the language barrier between us, I have managed to learn a lot from him. Soral is one of the last European intellectuals. And it is far from surprising that the Left is outraged by his profound political and ideological insights.
For quite a while those who oppose, satirize or criticize the domination of the Zionist lobby within French politics and media, seem to be subject to political abuse and judicial persecution. Why do you think the Zionist elite choose to target France in particular?
AS: It should be noted first that France has, or suffers from - depending on your point of view –  what is by far the largest Jewish community in Europe, with nearly 700,000 members, while  Italy or Spain, for example, have about  40,000. The pressure and the influence of this very organized  community on French power and policy are inevitably proportional to its size. 

There are also some historical components that are particular to France: France prides itself on being the country of human rights, it was the first nation to emancipate the Jews of Europe, it had the Dreyfus affair, the maintained guilt of Petainism, the Zionism of the Fourth Republic, the dominance of the Grand Orient masonry on the supposedly French socialist left ... These are some of the many factors that  give our "organized Jewish community" as it defines itself, its effective and overwhelming position of moral watchdog.
GA:  I think that the Jewish Lobby is particularly forceful in France as a result of the impact of the '68 student revolution. French society has been broken into a multitude of identity groups, and the more broken a society is, the more it tends to subscribe to Jewish politics. The reason is simple. After 3000 years of tribal exilic operation, the Jewish intelligencia is the most advanced in identity sectarian politics and cultural manipulation.
The gist of identity politics is an attempt to transform the cohesive host nation into a myriad of godless synagogues.  To some extent, Soral and Dieudonné have managed to unite what is left of the French working class; which includes Muslims,  Arabs, Blacks and  Whites. And as we have seen, the Jews and the Socialists see this development as an imminent danger.  
A controversial anti-immigration initiative won the backing of the Swiss electorate on February 9. EU politicians reacted harshly, some even  threatened  Switzerland. For its part, the State of Israel continues to enforce an immigration policy based  solely on the criteria of Jewish ethnicity, without receiving any criticism from the EU. How should we interpret this discrepancy?
AS: I think one of the best definitions of power, for those who have ceased to harbor illusions of democratic equality is: "Give to yourself and yourself alone the right to do the opposite of what you brutally require from others". 
The Zionist Jewish community, which dominates the Western discourse,  requires the goyim to behave as men of the left: anti-racist and anti-nationalist ... While they themselves behave as far right-wing men through their shameless support of a country (Israel) which is openly racist and ultra-nationalist.
GA: It is very simple. As much as  Jewish intelligencia, wants to break the host nation, to dismantle its cohesive narrative, and debase the patriotic impetus, the Jewish State is committed to Jewish interests that represent the complete opposite of the ideology it espouses. Israel defines itself as the Jewish State and  it subscribes to a racist, expansionist, nationalist and patriotic ideology.  This may seem to be a discrepancy, but in fact it isn’t.
The above dual ethic is actually engraved in Jewish emancipation philosophy.  The Jewish Haskala (enlightenment) motto that is mistakenly attributed to Moses Mendelssohn  instructs  the Jew- "be a Jew in your tent and a man on the street.” It teaches the Israelite to behave as a Jew at home but, while in the street to pretend to be a goy. This  perplexing dishonest dualism  (one lies to God at home while misleading the Goy in the street) explains the contradiction between the Jewish intelligencia call for diversity in the West, on the one hand, and the adherence to hard core patriotism in the Jewish State, on the other hand. The Jewish Haskala dual existential mode allows a clear distinction between the ‘Goyim universe’ and the ‘Jewish ghetto.’  In practice, Jewish intellectuals would teach  the Goyim about diversity and tolerance, yet defend  vile Judeo-centrism at home, i.e., Israel.
The expression "Judeo-Masonic conspiracy" is mainly used to discredit those who criticize the bond between the Masonic and the Zionist network. Is it possible to demonstrate this bond without being locked up in a "reductio ad hitlerum"?
 AS: No. The term "Judeo-Masonic Plutocracy" has cradled all the 30’s far-right discourse, so it's now an unusable phrase.  

Yet, it is enough to look at the claimed alliances currently in in the mondialist process to objectively determine that international finance, the Masonic networks and Zionism are openly working in concert to impose on us their unequal vision and domination.
GA:  For a long time I have suggested that there are no hidden conspiracies in the Jewish world - all is done in the open. I strongly suggest that instead of looking for conspiracies under the carpet, we learn to analyze mainstream news. Everything is there and in the open. In fact I argue that the real meaning of Jewish Power is the capacity to silence the discussion of Jewish power. To look for the ‘hidden agenda,' in that context, is to surrender to Jewish power. We must do the opposite. Look into the work of George Soros, AIPAC, CRIF, CFI, Lord Levy, Wall Street, etc.
Finally what is your reaction to the strategic coalition conducted by Lebanese Hezbollah with Christendom?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlXek4xQd381 

AS: The utmost respect. 

Facing the "clash of civilizations" strategy advocated by the American-Zionists, the transcurrent alliances - Middle-class/Proletariat but also Christians/Muslims - are the only solution. It took years of civil war for the Lebanese to understand this and I just hope we will not have to go that far in this disaster in France, in order to embark on this path of wisdom.
GA: I guess that such an inevitable coalition is what torments the Jewish intelligencia as inspired by the Frankfurt School to operate forcefully against the so -called ‘patriarchal West.’ It is  possible that  true diverse humanism (as oppose to ‘diversity’)  poses the ultimate danger to Jewish cultural narcissistic chauvinism.  In true diverse humanism, we’re all united in our search for the ethical and the universal, we revert to Athenian thinking and oppose the Bernard Henri Levis and the rest of the Jerusalemite cantors. 

undefined
The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity politics and Jewish Power in particular - available onAmazon.com  Amazon.co.uk

ِAlquds in Danger, where is the millions?

$
0
0




السيد حسن نصرالله  - القدس عاصمة فلسطين


"O people and political forces, don’t be deluded by the American Administration as it is the one occupying your Palestine, violating your Al-Quds, threatening your Holy mosque, and it is the one responsible, even before the enemy, of holding thousands of Palestinians in prisons, and of displacing, torturing, and besieging them in Gaza and the West Bank.



Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah Speech on Al Quds Day 2013 (IN PERSON) ENG SUBS
-------
The Whore-hood's first Qibla, and second Haram is no more in Jerusalem
Therefore, after Nato Mufti, Erdugan, the neo-saladin, intends to pray in  Amawides Mosque in Damuscus ‘soon’

Hamami from London to Mishaal, Leave Damascus now
“One of the most important direct results of Arab revolutions it dropped masks on many self-anointed culture and thought and even organizations and movements,(hinting to Hezbollah) which stood at the beginning with Egypt and Tunisia revolutions, then quickly changed the course when the train of change regulations reached the so-called revolutionary regimes) trading in everything, especially when the Syrian regime start shaking the verge of collapse to follow previous systems of oppression and domination.
Shocked, defeated psychologically and on the ground, they dislike what is happening, They find difficult to accept that the world has changed, that the slogans of the past century and its cries and silly media no longer have a place among the people revolted, with space media (Al-Jazeerah) conveying what’s happening moment by moment by the sound and image.


In a desperate attempt, perhaps in a miserable awakening before final doom, they are trying to grab the news here or there, even if the sites have not been heard of before, or from blogs or unknown sources, everything important to distort the image of the revolutions….”
Piling up higher, he imagined himself in Nasrallah's shoes he "Sincerely" Promised "
"We promised them with every revolution to rejoice their defeat and our next  gloat will be soon from free Damascus, (without losing a single nato life) God willing, that’s a promise! "
---------





PRESS TV: US SIGNALING TO ISRAEL BY DENYING VISAS

Next: Freed Maaloula Nuns Thank Assad, Ibrahim, Qatar on Release
Previous: ِAlquds in Danger, where is the millions?
$
0
0
The United States is sending signals to Israel that “it is far from being at the Israeli conduct” by denying visa requests from hundreds of Israeli military and intelligence officials, an activist says.
“I think the American administration realized by now that they were gambling and for more than a while on the wrong horse,” Gilad Atzmon told Press TV in a phone interview on Thursday.
He made the remarks after a report said Washington refused to grant visas to Israeli officials over the past year.
According to the report published in the Hebrew-language daily Maariv, Washington is also giving short-term visas to Israeli army officials who are already in the US or making some of them leave for Canada to get their visas renewed after weeks.
“They can see that their approach to the Syrian conflict was completely wrong. They followed the Israeli line,” the activist said.“This unique Wahhabi-Israeli-American” strategy “led nowhere.”
“America started to acknowledge that Iran is the real superpower in the region and moving toward better relationship with Iran would obviously mean deterioration of the relationship with Israel in spite of the Jewish lobby and in spite of the Jewish pressure in America,” he added.

Freed Maaloula Nuns Thank Assad, Ibrahim, Qatar on Release

Next: Palestinian committee condemns terrorists’ rejection to withdraw from al-Yarmouk Camp
Previous: PRESS TV: US SIGNALING TO ISRAEL BY DENYING VISAS
$
0
0
Local Editor

The released nuns expressed their thanks, via media outlets Freed Nunsat Jdeidet Yabous crossing, to the Syrian President Bashar Assad and the General Manager of the Lebanese General Security Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim as well as the state of Qatar for their efforts that led to their release. 

After the reception, the released nuns' procession continued to the Syrian capital Damascus where they spent the night at the headquarters of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate.

Major General Abbas Ibrahim announced that the deal was carried out according to its primary conditions despite the attempt of the militants to impose additional conditions.

Ibrahim also stressed that he will step up his efforts to release the two bishops who were also kidnapped in Syria.
تصريح احدى الراهبات المختطفات بعد تحريرهن ووصولهن الى سورية



الصور الاولى لوصول الراهبات المختطفات اللواتي تم تحريرهن




حوار الاخبارية _ مواكبة تحرير الراهبات المختط


After Three Months of Being Kidnapped, Maalula Nuns Set Free

After three months of being kidnapped, Maaloula nuns were freed on Sunday evening despite logistical obstacles that delayed their release.Maaloula nuns
Earlier in the day, General Security chief Maj. Gen. Abbas Ibrahim told Al-Manar TV that the release of the abducted nuns would be delayed for several hours after "logistical" obstacles related to the region’s geography emerged in the final stages of a swap deal.

The nuns headed through al-Masnaa border crossing between Lebanon and Syria into Jdeidet Yabous inside the Syrian territory where their reception was attended by clerics.

It is noteworthy that when the armed groups entered into the historic town Maaloula in Damascus on December, they kidnapped 12 nuns, from both Syria and Lebanon, from the monastery of Mar Takla.

Source: Al-Manar Website
09-03-2014 - 23:07 Last updated 10-03-2014

Palestinian committee condemns terrorists’ rejection to withdraw from al-Yarmouk Camp

Next: US Intel: 'The focus on Ukraine is allowing Assad to make substantial military gains"
Previous: Freed Maaloula Nuns Thank Assad, Ibrahim, Qatar on Release
$
0
0

Mar 09, 2014
Damascus, (SANA)



National Committee for Palestinian Dialogue in al-Yarmouk Camp condemned rejection of the armed terrorist groups of Jabhat al-Nusra and “The Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham” to withdraw from the camp, considering that the infiltration once again of those groups into the camp has posed a threat to the Palestinian initiative to end the crisis in the camp.
In a statement that SANA received a copy of it, the Committee affirmed that targeting the besieged citizens inside the camp is a continuation of the barbaric aggression on Syria’s citizens, land and national stances.

The aggression on Syria aims at liquidating the Palestinian cause and dropping the Palestinian right to return to their land, the statement added.
The Committee refused any “cheap” attempts to manipulate the humanitarian aspect in the camp, blaming terrorists for preventing aid from reaching the camp’s residents.
The Palestinian Committee reiterated its stance on all gunmen withdrawing from the camp and on resuming efforts to implement the Palestinian initiative.
Ambassador Abdul-Hadi: Solution in al-Yarmouk starts with keeping arms and gunmen out
In a relevant context, Ambassador Anwar Abdul-Hadi, Director of the Political Department of Palestine Liberation Organization, said a solution to the crisis in al-Yarmouk Camp in Damascus starts with emptying it of arms and gunmen as this is the only way for the residents to return to a safe camp.
During his meeting with the Czech Ambassador in Damascus Eva Filipi, Abdul-Hadi reaffirmed the clear Palestinian position on not interfering in the internal affairs of Syria.
For her part, Filipi stressed on a political solution to the crisis in Syria on the basis of Geneva and dialogue among all spectra of the Syrian society.
She highlighted the Czech’s stance which calls for the Palestinian people getting their legitimate rights guaranteed by the international legitimacy.
B. Mousa/ H. Said

Our friends, the Syrian rebels

"... Al-Qaeda affiliated rebels in Syria have taken control of Yarmouk camp, ceasing the flow of aid to tens of thousands of civilians who are trapped and living in desperate conditions.Jabhat al-Nusra, a rebel group that swears its loyalty to al-Qaeda, has seized checkpoints inside primarily Palestinian neighbourhood of Damascus, ending a fragile ceasefire that was being negotiated by the regime and the opposition, residents of Yarmouk said..."

US Intel: 'The focus on Ukraine is allowing Assad to make substantial military gains"

Next: Great interview with Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich on RT (must watch!)
Previous: Palestinian committee condemns terrorists’ rejection to withdraw from al-Yarmouk Camp
$
0
0


Putin's message to the West, "If you interfere in our affairs .. better start collecting firewood. "

US Intel: 'The focus on Ukraine is allowing Assad to make substantial military gains"

'President Obama is trying to prevent Ukraine from becoming the single policy issue that defines his presidency. However, the perception is rising in the White House that, rightly or wrongly, the crisis has become a personal contest which can only be settled between Obama and President Putin.  NSC officials tell us that this is both an advantage in that it lends weight to the exchanges between the two men and a drawback in that it involves Obama more intensively in the management of the crisis than he would otherwise wish. This week he has attended for example to budgetary matters and to the Middle East Peace Process. However, with a visit looming to Brussels at the end of the month for EU and NATO meetings, the White House knows that all eyes are on the Ukraine crisis. As an NSC official commented to us: “Against all the odds, Obama continues to believe that he can do a deal with Putin. His telephone exchanges lead him to conclude that Putin is intent on building a position of strength from which he will then negotiate.” From talking to other high-level contacts in Washington, our sense is that Obama’s conviction that a deal is doable is not widely shared. Even in the State Department there are senior officials who are much less optimistic that Putin is interested in negotiating. The Pentagon is also skeptical, but its military moves in the Baltics and Black Sea should not, as a senior strategist there commented to us, be seen as preparations for belligerence (See Dempsey's comments). “We are supporting diplomacy, not undermining it,” was his comment. In summary, therefore, Obama remains committed to diplomacy but is facing rising discontent at home, with pressure increasing to be tougher. Ironically, in the P5+1 negotiations on Iran, Russian experts are taking part in ongoing exchanges with the Iranians alongside US officials. State Department official tell us that they remain cautiously optimistic that an end agreement is possible. On Syria, by contrast, Intelligence Community analysts are worried that the focus on Ukraine is allowing the regime to make substantial military gains. As one commented to us:“The price of maintaining Crimea in Ukraine may be losing Syria.” Obama is due in Saudi Arabia at the conclusion of his European visit, so attention is back to the mideast'
Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 

999606_501558529933943_1497895926_n

March: Syrian Army Victories, Statements, Daily Updates

Great interview with Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich on RT (must watch!)

Next: Kofi Annan: Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey supplied Syrian opposition with money and arms
Previous: US Intel: 'The focus on Ukraine is allowing Assad to make substantial military gains"
$
0
0
Great interview with Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich on RT (must watch!)



Soraya's replies are, as always, fantastic, but what in the world is wrong with this anchor?! For the life of me I cannot imagine somebody working for RT not knowing and understanding what is really going on in the Ukraine. And yet, first Abby Martin, then Liz Wahl, now this clown?!  I can fully understand that a reporter for RT could disagree with a Russian policy - but all three of these guys are parroting the worst clichés of US propaganda.  What is the world is going on in RT and, most importantly, who hired these people?

Kofi Annan: Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey supplied Syrian opposition with money and arms

Next: This Is How Maloula Nuns Regained Freedom.. in Details
Previous: Great interview with Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich on RT (must watch!)
$
0
0

Mar 09, 2014
Vienna, (SANA)
Former UN Secretary General and former international envoy to Syria Kofi Annan said Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have supplied the “Syrian opposition” with money and arms.


In an interview with the Austrian Die Presse newspaper, Annan noted that some regional and Western countries rejected the six-point plan which he presented for solving the crisis in Syria because they had differences with the Syrian leadership or with Iran, Russia and China, adding that those countries then formed the so-called “Friends of Syria” group.

He reiterated the need to solve the crisis in Syria by peaceful and political means, expressing his opposition to any form of military intervention.
Annan, who was appointed as UN Special Envoy to Syria in February 2012, highlighted that the Syrian government showed positive reaction to his efforts early in his mission with regard to declaring a limited ceasefire while the other parties rejected that step.
The former international envoy stressed that Iran must be part of the solution in Syria given its great capabilities that allow it to exert an influence in the region and play an objective role to end the crisis, pointing out that Saudi Arabia opposed any Iranian role as it views Tehran as a rival in the regional and international arena.
Annan underscored that what made the US President Barack Obama hesitant to launch any military action against Syria despite pressure by the Pentagon and the US’s Western and Gulf allies was because of the fact that the situation in Syria is totally different from Libya or any other country given its sensitive geopolitical position.
He said that belief matched his visions to end the crisis in Syria peacefully when he told everybody that there could not be a military solution to the “conflict” in Syria, adding that no full agreement on his proposals was reached at the UN Security Council, “and that was why I had to quit my mission as an international envoy to Syria”.
Annan quit his position as an envoy and informed the UN of his intention not to renew his mission, which lasted until August 31 of 2012.
Annan expressed regret that Austria withdrew its forces from the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) in the occupied Syrian Golan, considering that the withdrawal of some Western states’ forces from Golan reflects these countries’ lack of desire and indifference to solve the crisis in Syria.
H. Said

This Is How Maloula Nuns Regained Freedom.. in Details

Next: Ukraine SITREP March 7, 09:03 EST (and a little debunking)
Previous: Kofi Annan: Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey supplied Syrian opposition with money and arms
$
0
0

Local Editor

Syria: kidnapped nuns of Maloula have been releasedThree different parties negotiated with Al-Nusra Front emir in Qalamoun, Abu Azzam al-Kuwaiti, in his headquarters in Yabroud over releasing the kidnapped nuns from Maloula before reaching the final deal on Sunday, the local daily Assafir reported Monday.

However, what had preceded the happy conclusion?

Publishing the full story behind the nuns' release, Assafir newspaper said that in the wake of the kidnapping, two tracks of negotiation started on the basis that the nuns were not hostages but guests who were to be freed easily, just like the Syrian opposition figures used to echo in order to cover up the kidnapping politically.

"Before Qatar joined negotiations in the first weeks of the kidnapping, and during the second assault on Maaloula on December 2, 2013, Abu Azzam al-Kuwaiti (deputy of Abu Malik al-Tali, Al-Nusra Front emir in Qalamoun) restored the kidnapped group from the first kidnapper and the previous smuggler between Lebanon and Syria, Methqal Hamama who is one of the leaders in the so-called Sarkha Brigades," Assafir narrated.

"In the beginning, the kidnappers called the United Nations office in Damascus. Yet, following a Skype-call between the ambassador Mokhtar Lamani, head of UN bureau, and al-Kuwaiti, Lamani refused to move to Yabroud and to negotiate with al-Nusra Front directly as the UN urged him not to communicate directly with the black-listed front," it said.

Another track of negotiation kicked off in parallel with the first, when the Yabroudi businessman, George Hassoani, played a prominent role. He wasn't a real mediator, but as a figure close to the Syrian government, he used to transfer the exchanged offers in coordination with the Lebanese Major-General Abbas Ibrahim.

Sometimes, and in order to gain time, Hassoani used to restore things to their proper framework when dealing with the kidnappers and replying to the permanent negotiator, Abu Azzam al-Kuwaiti , who did not take off his explosives belt while talking to Hassoani via Skype.

During negotiations , the kidnappers and the hostages moved to a residence home of Hassoani in Yabroud , which Al-Nusra Front had confiscated during his absence. The businessman paid the costs of the kidnappers throughout their stay in his three-floor home in order to improve the nuns' conditions and facilitate a means to communicate with them (the kidnapped nuns appeared twice within three months in televised videos).

The kidnappers repeatedly echoed that they were not looking for a ransom, but for a swap deal to release the detained women in the Syrian prisons. At the beginning, they presented hundreds of names, but decreased the number to 138 arrested women with a condition that the Syrian government should set free the Iraqi Saja Hamid al-Dulaimi, wife of one of al-Qaeda Iraqi leaders, along with her three children.

Syrian government refused the condition since Dulaimi doesn't hold the Syrian nationality, and stressed that the government does not have any kind of information about 66 names of the 138 submitted, in addition to that 10 of them had been freed previously.

Demanding the release of Dulaimi convinced those who were following negotiations that Kuwaiti was only a representative, and that true negotiators were somewhere else, because Kuwaiti was not able to answer the offers at the moment they were made.

Later, it was unfolded that he was nothing more than an intermediary in the negotiation process, which was controlled by other parties in al-Nusra Front and remotely directed by Abu Mohammad al-Golani, al-Nusra emir in the Levant.

Syrian track in the negotiations stalled earlier this year, and the Qatari channel has been activated in coordination with General Ibrahim. During the last month, Qatari envoys visited the area around Arsal mountains in North Lebanon, and began to speak directly to the kidnappers, but without achieving the slightest progress. The kidnappers provided Ibrahim with a list of the detained Syrian women that included no less than a thousand name, but the Syrian authorities neither agreed to negotiate it nor to consider it serious.

It was striking that the list included about 150 names of the "Islamists" detained in Roumieh prison in Lebanon, most of whom are of non-Lebanese nationalities. Ibrahim's position was firm refusing the release of any of Roumieh prisoners.

A Syrian official said that negotiations have been revived a few days ago, following important ground developments in Yabroud amid fierce battles in Qalamoun and the dispersion of militant groups which include ten thousand fighters on all fronts, and after the first kidnapper, Mithqal Hamama was killed in one of the Syrian army ambushes in the region.

A week ago, the kidnappers decided to leave the house of George Hassoani in Yabroud as the army was approaching it, along with the fall of strategic hills around Rima Farms on Yabroud outskirts. At this point, the detained nuns were distributed to a number of sites in Yabroud.

Here, the nuns' file appeared strongly to be bartered for what is beyond the ransom. Two days earlier, Abu Yazan, commander of the so-called 'Ghorabaa Brigade' in Qalamoun, called again a mediator in the Qatari channel and asked him to accelerate the completion of the deal, on condition to get 16 million dollars and the release of all the names mentioned in the list, adding again Saja al-Dulaimi, her three Iraqi children and her husband.

Abu Yazn also opened the security and military files, demanding a cease-fire around Yabroud and a halt of shelling against it. He also called for securing safe corridors for 1500 gunmen from Yabroud to Rankous  and Arsal, but this condition has been flatly refused.

According to a Syrian source, the Qataris paid the ransom, and that the Syrian authorities had agreed to release detainees, but the security and military files have been entirely ruled out of any negotiations, always according to the Lebanese daily Assafir.

Translated by Al-Manar English Website staff

Source: Assafir Newspaper
10-03-2014 - 18:07 Last updated 10-03-2014

Ukraine SITREP March 7, 09:03 EST (and a little debunking)

Next: A Multi-polar World Thanks to the Resistance in Syria
Previous: This Is How Maloula Nuns Regained Freedom.. in Details
$
0
0

Russia stands for freedom!The Saker

  • The situation outside Crimea is rapidly deteriorating.  Yesterday, a SWAT team of the Ukrainian SBU has arrested the "popular governor" of the Donetsk region.  He whereabouts are unknown.  The local police has also arrested an unknown number of anti-insurgent demonstrators.
  • Arrests of protesters have also happened in other cities of the Ukraine, including Odessa.  To my knowledge there are no signs of police forces siding with the anti-insurgent forces anywhere outside Crimea.
  • I have been parsing the pro-insurgency websites and news channels and they regularly report about Ukrainian units in Crimea which did not recognize the Crimean authorities and which remain loyal to the insurgency.  These sources claim that these units have even kept their weapons.  Some sources speak of 11 Ukrainian units, all surrounded by Russian forces.
  • The Russian blogosphere is awash with various reports all corroborating what what pretty clear from day 1: the mysterious armed units which appeared overnight in Crimea are, indeed, Spetsnaz GRU. They seem to be supported by Air-Assault and Airborne units.  Russian Mi-24 attack helicopters are also regularly seen.
  • The insurgents also seem to be in control of the Russian-Ukrainian border were they are constantly subjecting Russian citizens to intense searches, harassment and where many are simply turned back.
  • The Ukrainian SBU is threatening to arrest the ex-governor of Kharkov, Mikhail Dobkin, who resigned to run for president, on charges of plotting to overthrow the regime by force.  He is also being investigated for threatening the territorial integrity of the Ukraine.  So much for him running in the next elections.
I would like to address three aspects of the West's response to the situation in the Ukraine:

Firstthe use of billionaire oligarchs: I think that is a brilliant move.  While the West does not have enough money to bail out the Ukraine, it does have enough money to assist the billionaire oligarchs to buy-off the local police and security forces.   Think of it, you are a riot cop or a SBU agent, and the Kiev appointed governor offers to put you on a $5'000 a month salary to remain loyal to the insurgency.  That is when an average salary would be in the $200-$400 dollars a month.  What would you do?

Also, make no mistake about it, all these oligarchs are ruthless mobsters and like any mobsters they have their own enforcers and hired thugs whom they can use to suppress a crowd (as this was done in Moscow in 1993 when armed thugs hired by the mayor of Moscow, Luzhkov - who was also a mobster - shot and killed many pro-Parliament supporters.

This tells me that unless the Russian-speaking population is willing to generate enough violent resistance to actually overcome these police and security forces the oligarchs might well prevail.

Second, all the talk about NATO ships entering the Black SeaYes, that could be linked to the situation in the Ukraine but no, this is not a direct threat for Russia.  These ships can "show the flag" - a very important Navy mission.  They can also collect intelligence on the Russians.  And they can show support for the insurgency.  But in terms of military threat, the Black Sea is a lake by US Navy standards, which is waaaaaaay to close to the Russian Federation and its airpower and therefore not a place the USN would pick to attack Russia.  People often assume that the main threat to a navy is another navy.  This is not so, the worst threat for a navy is the other guy's airpower and any US ship in the Black Sea would have a zero chance of survival against the Russian air force, especially without a good air cover of its own.  At this point in time, the US and NATO are not ready to commit enough airpower to engage in combat air patrols, nevermind a full scale war, over the Black Sea.  In fact, the US has much better options to attack Russian forces in Crimea than sending ships into the Black Sea.  Bottom line: these USN ship are not a military threat to anybody.

Third, the US/NATO missile shield.  Some have speculated that the US/NATO anti-missile shield being currently developed and deployed in eastern Europe could offer a protective umbrella under which NATO could attack or threaten to attack.  Yes, this was the plan but no, this will not work.  At this point in time the system is not really operational.  Furthermore, Russia has the means to destroy it very rapidly (using Iskander missiles and Spetsnaz forces).  Finally, this system is designed to intercept older generation missiles and not the advanced types currently being fielded in Russia.

Even though I am by nature a pessimist, I see no signs of the US or NATO gearing up for war against Russia.  And, indeed, why should they when for a tiny fraction of the price and at zero risk they can simply buy off the security forces in the regions which oppose the insurgency?  And in the unlikely scenario that Russia would use military force outside Crimea, nobody at SHAPE is going to go to war over Lugansk, Donetsk or Kharkov.  Yes, they are every bit as evil has Hitler was but, no, they don't have his courage.

Stay tuned.

The Saker

A Multi-polar World Thanks to the Resistance in Syria

Next: Egypt’s shameful rejection of Mairead Maguire and other peace advocates
Previous: Ukraine SITREP March 7, 09:03 EST (and a little debunking)
$
0
0

Two pictures which really say it all



Orient Tendencies

Monday January 14, 2013, no114

Weekly information and analysis bulletin specialized in Arab Middle Eastern affairs prepared by neworientnews.com
Editor in chief Wassim Raad
wassimraad73@gmail.com
- See more at: http://www.neworientnews.com/news/fullnews.php?news_id=84924#sthash.YFE8LH9P.dpuf



على من تقرأ مزاميرك يا داوود والثورة السورية صماء ..؟؟
By Ghaleb Kandil
The conflict of Ukraine initiated by the United States and the West, which is accompanied by threats and interventions in the pre-square of Russia, triggering a direct confrontation with the rising Russian power, aims to impose new rules in accordance with a vision defended by U.S. strategists, including Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger and Richard Haas. This vision is a multi-polar world led by the United States, in opposition to the Russian vision of an equal relationship, as part of an international partnership led by Russia and America.
The Russian response in Ukraine is offensive and meets the soft power strategy, based on the supremacy of geographic, demographic and economic factors. The West was shocked by the Russian action in the Crimea, which is preparing for a referendum in the next few days to decide union with the Russian Federation, while activism is growing in other provinces of Ukraine on the basis of Slavic ethnic ties and religious affiliation to the Orthodox Church, strengthened by four centuries of history.
Faced with the option of sanctions wielded by the West, Russia has reacted strongly, suggesting its intention, in the case of enforcement of these threats, to accelerate steps to transform the BRICS and Shanghai organization in a powerful international, independent and competing U.S. financial structure. Moscow will work to become an international financial center, rival to New York, as a platform for international transactions, which would threaten the supremacy of the dollar as a safe-haven currency. Russia also plans to seek a restructuring of the United Nations.
In addition, any U.S. decision to implement international sanctions against Russia will cause serious differences between Washington and its European allies, who have already expressed reservations about U.S. demands to reduce their trade with Russia. Especially since the Russians have assured that they would impose their own sanctions against U.S. and European companies. Number of articles in the European press reflected the British, French and German fears of such Russian measures.
Ukrainian crisis goes beyond the boundaries of this country. It clearly reflects the contours of the struggle Russia has lead to the end to get back his historical influence in the Slavic countries of Eastern Europe, fell into the hands of the West after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Experts assure that if Russia succeeds in imposing its vision of the political future of Ukraine, significant internal developments will follow in other countries, such as Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary.
The West, led by the United States, was surprised by the reaction of the Russians, who have decided to accept the challenge, forcing NATO to retreat for fear of direct confrontation. This means that the United States will be forced, ultimately, to accept new rules for international partnership without American leadership. In addition, the analysis saying that the Ukrainian crisis, near Russia, will affect other issues (war in Syria, Iran’s nuclear … ) is an illusion, because these conflicts  have their own dynamics and does not depend only on Russia’s will.
Syria has its own will and its own popular and military force. Its resistance helped Russia to build new international balances, as well as the emergence of Iran as a regional power. Firmness and determination displayed by Vladimir Putin in both cases are the result of the balance of power, which will be reinforced by the Ukrainian crisis. Many experts and Western research centers have drawn comparisons between the resistance of President Bashar al- Assad, the state, the people and the Syrian army, facing a universal war which lasts for three years, and the flight of President Viktor Yushchenko after a few hours facing a group of saboteur, who stormed his palace and established an illegitimate power from a coup.


The new world will be born on the ruins of American illusions and emerge on the solid rock of the resistance of Syria.
______________________________________________________________
Statements
Michel Suleiman, President of the Republic
«A strong president does not submit to the dictates of that party (Hezbollah). Hezbollah’s demands overstep all limits of free expression without showing consideration for law or ethics. I have proposed a defensive strategy protecting the principles of resistance in a recent address. The resistance must submit to applicable laws and principles rather than being biased towards or subservient to the tripartite people-army-resistance formula.»
Gebran Bassil, Foreign Minister
«The ‘open door’ policy towards the refugees cannot be adopted in Lebanon anymore, because an internal explosion is imminent if the situation remains as it is. The refugee issue affects Lebanon, it is related to Lebanon’s existence and identity. Lebanon is screaming to you from its pain, answer the scream so that it will not scream in the face of the whole world by stopping the influx of refugees. Lebanon has the right to free its territories and to resist against any Israeli aggression by all legitimate means. No one in the Arab community has the right to give up resistance in the face of Israeli occupation.»
Beshara Rai, Maronite Patriarch
«Lebanon is a civil state as show in the National Charter and Article 9 of the Constitution, where it is described as a non-religious state whose power is through the people and not through religion. Lebanon’s neutrality is as a need for the region. That is why we must keep the country away from regional and international fronts, so it can continue to play its role and fulfill its message.»
Sheikh Naïm Kassem, Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General
«The resistance is not a proposal or an idea to discuss or experiment. It is a constant of Lebanon, and it is clear that the right of resistance is at the heart of the ministerial statement and is an essential preamble.»
 ______________________________________________________________
Events

  • ما هي أهمية تحرير الزارة وتداعياته على المسلحين في الشمال و المناطق الحدودية ؟Syrian regime troops Saturday captured a rebel-held town near a famed Crusader castle in the strategic province of Homs, state media and a monitoring group said, after nearly a month of fighting. The town of Zara, near the Krak des Chevaliers castle in Homs province, fell to government forces a day after it was hit by air strikes, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. A source in the pro-regime National Defense Forces militia was quoted by state news agency SANA as saying the army had “seized full control of Zara after having wiped out the terrorists” — the regime’s term for rebel fighters. The source added search operations were underway to make sure there were no gunmen hiding in the town or surrounding orchards. The Observatory said the town, which is mostly inhabited by the Sunni Turkmen minority, was taken after “fierce fighting between loyalist troops and fighters from Jund al-Sham and other Islamist groups.”  The capture of Zara — which lies west of Homs city — comes as the army is battling rebels further south around Yabrud, an insurgent stronghold in the Qalamoun mountains close to the Lebanese border. The fighting is part of an army offensive launched late last year also to secure the Damascus-Homs highway and to several a key rebel supply route to the town of Arsal in Lebanon’s Beqaa Valley.
  • Saudi and Emirati pundits have quit major media outlets in Qatar, including the broadcaster of top-flight European football, they said on Sunday, as tensions soar between Doha and Gulf states. In an unprecedented decision on Wednesday, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain withdrew their envoys to Qatar, which they accused of meddling in their internal affairs by supporting Islamists. Doha has dismissed the charge, citing instead differences in regional politics. Saudi columnist Samar al-Mogren, who writes for al-Arab Qatari daily, tweeted on Sunday that the “Saudi ministry of culture and information has decided to end the collaboration of Saudi writers with Qatari newspapers.” She said that two other Saudi writers, Saleh al-Shehi and Ahmed bin Rashed al-Saeed, had also stopped writing for Qatari newspapers based on the ministry’s orders. Another writer, Muhanna al-Hubail, had received similar orders from the ministry, said Mogren. Meanwhile, Emirati commentators and analysts announced they had quit BeIn Sports, which exclusively broadcasts matches from the English Premier League and the Spanish La Liga to millions of football fans across the Middle East. Ali Saeed al-Kaabi and Fares Awad announced on Twitter Saturday their resignation from BeIn, without giving any reasons. Emirati football pundit Sultan Rashed said he would stop contributing to BeIn, while analyst Hassan al-Jassmi said he would no longer appear on both BeIn and al-Kass, another Qatari sports channel. Qatar is a staunch supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood, viewed by most conservative monarchies of the Gulf as a threat to their grip on power in their countries because of its grassroots political advocacy and calls for Islamic governance.
  • The Al-Nusra Front in Lebanon claimed responsibility for the rocket attack that hit Hermel earlier on Saturday. “The Al-Nusra Front in Lebanon, in coordination with Abdullah Azzam Brigades’ Marwan Hadid Brigades, targeted the stronghold of Iran’s party [in reference to Hezbollah] in Hermel with six Grad missiles,” a statement released Saturday on the terrorist organization’s Twitter account said. It added that the attack came in retaliation to Hezbollah’s “killing of our people in Syria and its injustice towards our people in Lebanon, especially the detainees.” “The operations will carry on, God willing, in Syria and Lebanon against [Hezbollah],” the statement warned. Earlier on Saturday, the National News Agency reported that two rockets originating from the Anti-Lebanon Mountains landed on the eastern side of Hermel near the state hospital, without causing any casualties. Three other missiles hit Beqaa’s Al-Qaa without causing any damages either, the Lebanon’s state news agency reported later in the day. Lebanese border regions have witnessed numerous rocket attacks and other violations, as fighting continues between rebel and regime troops across the border in Syria.
______________________________________________________________
Press review
As Safir (Lebanese daily, Arab nationalist)
(March  8, 2014)
Hezbollah criticized President Michel Suleiman’s insistence that the Baabda Declaration is a vital document for Lebanon, and called on him to apologize for the recent position he has taken towards the party.
Hezbollah leadership sources expressed the party’s consternation at [Suleiman’s] insistence on inflating the Baabda Declaration, considering it the achievement of the age and estimating that what it contains is more important than the Taif agreement and the constitution.
That statement is not a constitution and there were reservations about it from the first moment.
The source also called the recent position Suleiman has taken toward the party a mistake and demanded an apology. “[Suleiman] has erred and today [he] must take back his mistake and present a clear and frank apology to amend his recent stances.”
“This is the only way his relationship with the resistance can be re-ordered and corrected.”
The recent spat comes after Suleiman called for “not clinging to wooden formulas that hinder the drafting of the ministerial statement,” in reference to the people-army-resistance formula championed by Hezbollah.
As Safir (March 8, 2014)
Labor Minister Sejaan Azzi said he is optimistic that calls and discussions before the ministerial statement drafting committee’s next meeting on Tuesday will lead to positive results.
“There is a great hope that the calls over the coming days will lead to some kind of result,” Azzi told As-Safir. “I expect that we will either go to parliament with a ministerial statement or that we will tackle the remaining complications.”
He added that “the committee is not ineffective, but it lacks the political firmness [necessary] to fully carry out its role.”
Ministerial sources said that while the committee’s upcoming session could be its last, a failure to reach agreement on the document before March 17 would create a new problem for the country.
“Either endorsement of the draft ministerial statement or raising [it] to the parliament for a final decision is expected,” sources said.
“If the ministerial statement is not finalized before the 17th of the month, there will be a new problem in the country.”
An Nahar (Lebanese daily, close to March-14 Coalition)
(March 8, 2014)
Lebanon’s Interior Minister Nohad Mashnouq defended his Thursday meeting with Change and Reform bloc leader MP Michel Aoun on the ministerial statement after the Lebanese Forces took umbrage at the sit-down. “The conversation with Aoun was limited to explaining our position on the resistance clause in the ministerial statement,” the Future Movement minister told An-Nahar newspaper in comments published Friday. “That is, that the resistance must be under the sovereignty and authority of the state.”
Mashnouq’s visit offended his Future Movement’s ally the Lebanese Forces, which oppose Aoun and his party.
The meeting prompted Future Movement leader MP Saad Hariri and LF leader Samir Geagea to discuss local and regional matters and the efforts being made to ensure that presidential elections be held within the constitutional timeframe.
The interior minister further defended himself, saying that he conducted an “inaugural tour” of sit-downs with top parties, but did not meet with any Hezbollah figures.
An Nahar (March 7, 2014)
Speaker Nabih Berri said that while today’s meeting of the ministerial statement committee is unlikely to reach agreement on a final format for the document there are no major obstacles to its completion.
“With regard to the progress of the ministerial statement until the present, I say that there is nothing palpable and there is nothing [problematic],” Berri told An-Nahar. “In the end it is in no-one’s interests not to reach [agreement] on a statement.”
He also mentioned that the constitution grants the cabinet 30 days to produce a ministerial statement, thereby setting a March 17 deadline for the current cabinet. If the government does not produce the statement by that date, the president is required to call for parliamentary consultations and the cabinet becomes a caretaker government.
Meanwhile, President Michel Suleiman said he felt reassured the government would not face problems overcoming present issues of contention.
“There is no matter that will break up the cabinet… the Baabda Declaration has become [more important] than the ministerial statement, which does not mention everything,” Suleiman said in a statement before returning from the International Support Group for Lebanon conference in Paris.
“The subject of resistance has solutions, and a flexible format for mentioning it can be reached without any problems.”
Al Akhbar (Lebanese Daily close to the Lebanese Resistance)
Suhaib Anjarani (March 8, 2014)
Yesterday, it appeared as if Syria was on the verge of a new stage of conflict between jihadi factions, one that is expected to escalate full to a “jihadist civil war” between ISIS on one side and al-Nusra Front and the Islamic Front on the other.
The first signs of this impending civil war appeared in ISIS spokesman Mohammed al-Adnani’s audio message. He tried to entice jihadists by addressing “all those who seek jihad in the name of Allah… all those who got confused, who are now lost and fearing sedition and seeking reason, and those who consider stopping, backing down or staying neutral.”
Though his message sounded rather calm, it in fact clearly carried direct threats against all those who stand against ISIS. He described al-Nusra Front as the “Deception and Betrayal Front.” He also slammed the Islamic Front, describing it as “the Harm and al-Saud Front (referring to the al-Saud family that rules Saudi Arabia). Al-Adnani also stressed ISIS’s hostility toward the United States and the West, saying: “there is no other country on earth that has united all infidel forces against ISIS.”
Al-Adnani implicitly called upon jihadists to join ISIS, saying “oh people seeking righteous… how could you join the ranks of Salim Idriss the devil, or al-Jarba party, or even Jamal Maarouf’s militias and others supported by the Saudis, America and the infidels of the West.”
He also addressed the muhajirin- foreign fighters in Syria- saying “Oh muhajirin still fighting along with other the factions. Look around you to see how many other foreign fighters have remained with you,” calling upon al-Ansar- Syrian jihadists- to follow in the footsteps of the muhajirin saying: “oh Ansar follow the example of the muhajirin, they are the security valve of every battlefield of jihad.”
Al-Adnani reiterated that it wasn’t ISIS that started the fighting between jihadist groups, claiming that “accusations against it are void,” and threatening all those “who don’t fear Allah’s wrath and they that dare to attack us.”
He appeared even more threatening when speaking about “the fake claims that the ISIS refused to follow sharia,” presenting many examples when ISIS accepted verdicts issued by the joint tribunals. However, he stressed that tribunals invoked by al-Nusra Front are unacceptable. “Maybe their first ruling would be that ISIS leaves Syria and give up the land to thieves and traitors,” al- Adnani said, adding, “that’s something that would call for hitting heads, breaking necks, and splitting open abdomens.”
He also slammed the initiative of Saudi Sheikh Abdullah al-Mouhaysini who was recently injured in the head after joining the ranks of the Islamic Front in the industrial district in the Sheikh Najjar region in Aleppo.
While al-Adnani ignored the threats of al-Nusra Front chief, Abu Mohammed al-Golani, he insisted on responding to Abu Abdullah al-Shami, known as the “al-Nusra judge,” and a member of its Shura council. He called him a liar and called upon him to resort to mubahala (an Islamic tradition where two opposing sides mutually pray for the truth).
Al-Adnani denied that ISIS accepted to mubahala, referring its dispute with al-Nusra Front to al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. According to a jihadi source speaking to Al-Akhbar “al-Adnani’s message is a proof of ISIS’s incapacity to confront others. It is crumbling to the point that it is now seeking pity from other jihadists.”
“The call to mubahala is an attempt to escape confrontation but our retaliation will only hit them on the battlefield,” the source affiliated with al-Nusra Front said. Sources close to the Islamic Front refused to comment.
Meanwhile, a Chechen source affiliated with ISIS said, “the most important part of Sheikh al-Adnani’s message was he slammed al-Golani, not al-Nusra Front. We are the true fighters of al-Nusra Front, the group sent by Emir Abu Baker to Syria and integrated within the Islamic State. It is now time to put matters into perspective.”
ISIS supporters celebrated al-Adnani’s message over Twitter, the main social media platform used by jihadists. Abu Mouaz al-Shari, an ISIS judge, summed up al-Adnani’s speech saying, “The army, the military council, the National Coalition and the National Council… they all side with America in an attempt to destroy the Islamic project.” Al-Nusra affiliates, along with its sheikhs and judges, mocked the message and considered it laughable.
His real name in thought to be Taha Sobhi Falaha and was born in 1977 in Banash, a village in Aleppo’s countryside. He was first the spokesman of ISIS and was later appointed an emir over the Levant. According to jihadi sources “Sheikh al-Adnani was among the first foreign fighters in Iraq when the American campaign began. He is also a member of the Shura al-Mujahidin Council.
The Multi-National Forces arrested al-Adnani at Iraq’s al-Anbar in May 2005 under his fake name “Yasser Khalaf Hussein Nazal al-Rawi” and was released in 2010.
An Iraqi intelligence official said back in December 2012 that al-Adnani is currently using a number of aliases including “Abu Mohamed al-Adnani, Taha al-Banshi, Jaber Taha Falah, Abu Baker al-Khatab and Abu Sadek al-Rawi.”
Al Akhbar (March 8, 2014)
Lea al-Qazzi
Long gone are the days when the leader of the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM), MP Michel Aoun, would accuse his political opponents of subordination to petrodollar states. After retreating from his “one-way ticket” rhetoric about former Prime Minister Saad Hariri’s self-imposed exile, he is now recalibrating his relationship with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia months before the Lebanese presidential elections.
Suddenly, it appears as though vindication is not impossible (in reference to the title of the book published by the FPM The Impossible Vindication, which details the mismanagement of government finances at the hands of the Future Movement) as Aoun decided to transcend his track record with Saudi Arabia, a country that happens to sponsor terrorism and fundamentalist movements around the world.
He retracted his previous statements, although he never used to miss an opportunity to hurl accusations at the kingdom and its primary ally in Lebanon, the Future Movement. Saudi Ambassador Ali al-Asiri’s visits to Aoun helped melt the ice but until now no official date has been set for Aoun to answer the Saudi invitation to visit the kingdom.
A FPM MP says: “The FPM decided to distance itself from vertical alignments and therefore end its estrangement from all domestic and foreign forces.” We also “seek to put an end to any hostility we might have with certain political forces.” Therefore, “we decided to readjust our relationships, especially with Saudi Arabia.”
According to a source close to the FPM leadership, Aoun believes he is close to entering the presidential palace, “As if he’s got a foot in the door and all he needs is to waltz in.” He is willing to enter into a dialogue with everyone to reach his goal. The FPM MP does not buy what is being said about his party’s leader, arguing instead: “We are convinced that we need Saudi Arabia to maintain Lebanon’s stability as it has proven that it is a very influential player inside Lebanon.”
During the days of confrontation between the FPM and Saudi Arabia, there were major differences between the two sides that led to antipathy and divergence. Currently, the FPM MP says: “The more Saudi Arabia moves in our direction, the more it will find us meeting it half way.” The relationship between the kingdom and Aoun evolved as “we have moved it from a stage of antagonism to one of open communication in order to reach an understanding that can be translated in the forthcoming elections.”
The FPM’s alliance with Hezbollah did not pose an obstacle. “Contrary to the impression we give off that we are part of the regional struggle, we are not connected to anyone.” The FPM source points out that “it is normal for Aoun to try to develop his relationship with Saudi Arabia. He believes he has the will and the ability to change it. Plus, we were never opposed to building good relationships with anyone, including the Saudis.”
He adds: “We are on the verge of important milestones in the country and it is normal that each side tries to bring together parties divided over the Syrian crisis.” Therein lies the significance of the the FPM’s relationship with its allies, especially Hezbollah, that is “built on trust in addition to the fact that Aoun has a large margin of openness towards everybody, something that not every party, movement, or side has.”
Their allies have not taken an official position regarding the FPM’s rapprochement with Saudi Arabia and so far Hezbollah is silent. Sources close to the party say that its leadership “trusts Aoun’s actions and has no problem with his openness towards anyone.” But at “meetings of party members there is a conviction that Saudi Arabia and Hariri will not give Aoun what he wants in terms of the presidential elections.”
Sources from the FPM’s other ally, the Marada Party, say that they are “not disturbed by rapprochement between any forces but it would be better if Aoun and his group embarked on this process together and not individually so it won’t appear as though it is a transitory development aimed at securing the presidential seat presidential elections.” The FPM MP affirms that “there are always channels of coordination with our allies whom we inform of our meetings with Saudi Arabia and the Future Movement.” As for the Marada Party, “they should reassess whom they delegate to coordinate with us. Perhaps they do not inform their leadership of what is going on.”
Future Movement sources scoff at the flirtation between their patron Saudi Arabia and the FPM. They believe that, “Aoun is trying to market himself to convince everyone that it is a good thing if he were to become president.” According to these sources, it is not surprising for Saudi Arabia to host Aoun because “the Saudis do not close their doors in the face of anyone.” At the same time, establishing contact and communication with Aoun does not mean that they believe in the visitor or in his choices.” They stress that Saudi Arabia does not have a name for its presidential candidate yet but “it is interested in choosing a name that it feels comfortable with. Until now, it is surely not convinced that Michel Aoun is that name.”
Al Akhbar (March 5, 2014)
Ibrahim al-Amin
Our problem was with the two generals, the president and the minister of justice, and now a third person has gotten involved rather crudely: the new minister of information, Ramzi Jreij. The Lebanese Broadcasting Corporation (LBC) interviewed him yesterday to get his opinion on Ashraf Rifi’s referral of Al-Akhbarto the public prosecutor to take legal action against the newspaper.
Jreij was asked about his opinion regarding Monday’s editorial titled “Lebanon Without a President.” Jreij, holding yesterday’s issue of Al-Akhbar, told LBC that Ibrahim al-Amin’s editorial contained insults against the president and his post, in reference to yesterday’s editorial – rather than the one from Monday. This is an error, so we will wait for the minister to clarify whether he was commenting on yesterday’s editorial, or whether there was an error in the editing of the report.
In reality, the minister of information seems to have missed the fact that Monday’s editorial was a political opinion about the contents of the president’s speech. It contained legitimate criticism of Michel Suleiman’s attitudes on what is a sensitive issue, that is, the Resistance. No matter what one has to say about some of the statements in the editorial, these express an opinion, and whoever wishes to understand them differently to provoke a confrontation, is free to do so.
Also, the minister of information, who is a legal expert, missed the fact that Tuesday’s editorial contained the equivalent of a “tip” to the public prosecutor, regarding counterfeiting perpetrated by the president when he was commander of the army, and accusations against the minister of justice over various irregularities.
In other words, does the minister of information, in his current capacity and as a legal expert, not know that he should go the judiciary and ask it to intervene to establish the truth? Here too, we did not know what the minister of information meant to say, or is the problem in the editing again?
In this regard, our position is clear; it says:
First: We at Al-Akhbar will not appear before the public prosecution until the president and the minister of justice are summoned to appear before the court to investigate all the accusations made against them. If some people believe that they have sufficient immunity to shield them from accountability or prosecution, then we give ourselves the right to be immune from being held accountable and prosecuted too.
The judiciary must act in order to prevent the political authorities from deciding what the press can publish; those type of decisions belong to the judiciary.
Second: Our position in rejection of any campaign targeting the Resistance against the occupation is irreversible. We will continue to question the patriotism and honor of anyone who assails the Resistance.
We will continue to criticize and expose all those who undertake political, media, or field actions against the Resistance. Will not wait for anybody’s approval, be it the political authorities, the judicial authorities, the security authorities, or the partisan authorities. Those who do not like this can take a hike!
Third: The silence of the press syndicate and the order of journalists over this frenzied campaign against the media by both the Court of Publications and the Ministry of Justice, could motivate the political authorities to press ahead in its battle to stifle opinions. However, these two unions only represent the persons of the members of their councils, and they no longer enjoy our confidence, until they wake up from their coma.
But what about the “tough guy” Minister of Justice Ashraf Rifi, who tweeted from Saudi Arabia that the time for debauchery and insults is behind us, promising to build a state of institutions?
Rifi has been in Saudi Arabia for several days. His office leaked information that he would be attending a technical conference, and meeting with Saudi officials on the sidelines.
So far, there has been no official confirmation from his office or Saudi media that he has arrived in Saudi, taken part in any conference, or met with Saudi officials. So what is he doing there exactly?
Of course, we will not embarrass Rifi and wait for him to tell us what he learned about Saudi justice, or ask him about his meetings. We also will not embarrass him and ask him whether it was him personally who tweeted yesterday, or whether someone else in Beirut, before he took permission from Rifi, tweeted on his behalf, and whether Rifi approved only after the fact.
But let us consider the following account. And let him and Saudi Arabia say what they want to say.
Last Sunday and throughout the next day, there were extensive phone calls being made between Riyadh, Jeddah, and Beirut. Security officials in the kingdom were asking persistently whether reports are true that Hezbollah intends to carry out a military-security move that would encompass all of Lebanon, in a repeat of May 7, 2008.
Saudi officials even asked security officers in their embassy in Beirut and Lebanese counterparts to quickly verify this information. When they were told that there were no indications that something like this was going to happen, the callers from Riyadh stressed that the information they had came from a “well-informed source,” requesting further information.
Many hours passed before the Saudi officials were convinced that the reports were unfounded. But in Beirut, some were interested to find out who was this source that unnerved the kingdom for more than 24 hours.
It soon turned out that it was Rifi himself, boasting to the Saudi officials with his information, which, he claimed, indicated that “Hezbollah is in a state of hysteria, and is planning to take action against its opponents.” Of course, as one official in Beirut said, “We all know what else Rifi told the Saudi officials: Help us fight Hezbollah.”
Going to court? Yeah right.
Al Joumhouria (Lebanese Daily close to March-14 coalition)
(March 6, 2014)
President Michel Suleiman met with Future Movement leader MP Saad Hariri during his stay in Paris for the donor conference. Suleiman and Hariri met during a dinner held by deputy Speaker Farid Makari and discussed the latest developments in Lebanon, the paper said.
The two also discussed the proposed formulas to draft the ministerial statement, as well as the campaign waged by Hezbollah against Suleiman.
A one-day international donor conference convened in Paris on Wednesday to raise foreign funds for Lebanon to provide assistance to the growing influx of Syrian refugees.   
Al Liwaa (Lebanese Daily close to March-14 coalition)
(March 6, 2014)
Future bloc MP Ammar Houri said that the war of words between Hezbollah and President Michel Suleiman did not affect the discussions on the ministerial statement.
“There is a great hope that the committee agrees on a consensual ministerial statement that is accepted by everyone before the expiry of the thirty-day deadline,” Houri told Al-Liwaa.
However, the MP voiced his fear that Hezbollah’s verbal attack against Suleiman aimed at obstructing the upcoming presidential election.
“It is a blatant attempt by Hezbollah to show that it alone can define the qualifications of the new president, something that we can never accept,” Houri said.

Egypt’s shameful rejection of Mairead Maguire and other peace advocates

Next: Ukraine SITREP March 8, 16:29 EST (and a little debunking)
Previous: A Multi-polar World Thanks to the Resistance in Syria
$
0
0


The Syria Solidarity Movement views with sadness and dismay the Egyptian government’s denial of entry to Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire for the purpose of transiting to Gaza to attend the International Women’s Day commemorations.  Ms. Maguire is a good friend of the Syria Solidarity Movement and has played a central role in the promotion of peace, justice and human rights in Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Palestine, and many other places throughout the world.

 
The Egyptian government knows that Ms. Maguire is an advocate and practitioner of nonviolence and that she is completely harmless to all human life.  Furthermore, the regime knows that the Egyptian people are among the most steadfast supporters of justice for Palestine. The only possible explanation for the refusal to admit Ms. Maguire, therefore, is to prevent the expression of her message of hope and solidarity to Palestinians in Gaza and to demonstrate that the Egyptian authorities will repress such thought and speech regardless of its source.  Such repression serves only the cause of the Israeli oppressor.

Egypt’s treatment of Ms. Maguire is hardly unique.  Egyptian officers used brutal force on her colleague, Medea Benjamin, who helped organize the delegation, causing her grievous bodily harm and even refusing access to medical attention.  Such violence against a peaceful visitor is unfortunately indicative of a brutal regime which has killed thousands of its own citizens expressing their opposition to the overthrow of the elected government.

Egypt is of course hardly the only perpetrator of tyranny.  One of the main sponsors of the current Egyptian government is the U.S., which provides billions of dollars in aid, even in defiance of its own laws against support for regimes that seize power in a coup d’état.  Additionally, despite the ostensible protection of free speech in the U.S., the Obama regime has prohibited Syria’s Ambassador to the UN, Bashar Jaafari from traveling more than 25 miles from UN headquarters in New York in response to requests for him to speak or for any other reason.  Apparently, the expression of an alternative point of view is too much for the U.S. to bear, whether at home, in Egypt, or anywhere else it wishes to project its power.

The Syria Solidarity Movement declares its support for Mairead Maguire and other exponents of compassion, free speech, human rights and respect for diversity.  We therefore ask all people and institutions of conscience to advocate on behalf of Ms. Maguire and other spokespersons for values and principles that raise human dignity for us all.
ssmlogo-blackbackground

Ukraine SITREP March 8, 16:29 EST (and a little debunking)

Next: Saudi-US Relations: "Storms of the Desert"
Previous: Egypt’s shameful rejection of Mairead Maguire and other peace advocates
$
0
0

Russia stands for freedom!THE SAKER

  • A deputy of the Ukrainian Rada who spoke on Russian TV from Moscow said that his contacts in the Crimea had informed him that the Ukrainian side had deployed unknown number of Grad BM-21M multiple-launch rocket systems (MRLS) just 2 way from the first Crimean checkpoints (these relatively old systems - they were built in the 1960s - have a 20 miles - 30km - range).
  • Big demonstration in Kharkov were the crowd is demanding a referendum on the future autonomy of the region, the local election of a governor, keeping the money of local taxes in the region. Two Berkut officers were declared honorary citizens of the city.
  • Bid demonstration in Donestk where the crowd is demanding a referendum on the future of the Donbass region and the freeing of the locally elected "popular governor". Crimea is preparing for the referendum next week. All voting booth will have cameras and international observers have been invited. Those not included in electoral lists will have the right to vote just by presenting a local ID. A vote to be valid will need at least a 50% participation.
Now let's turn to some corporate media propaganda debunking:

Blackwater and other mercenaries: to the extend that any of them have really made it to the Ukraine, their mission will be the protection of certain individuals and objects, but not attacking Russian-speakers in the Ukraine, much less so the Russian military in Crimea.  Why?  Because there are plenty of very competent instructors in the Ukraine insurgents for such missions, and do so at a fraction of the costs of hiring Blackwater & Co.  Then, the political scandal of just one US mercenary caught fighting the Russians would be huge, not to mention the headache of getting him back.  But the main reason is that there is plenty of expertise available locally, so the only real advantage of using US mercenaries is that they are not Ukrainians, but that is only an advantage in a very limited set of consequences.

US/EU sanctions against Russia: this morning I watch an interesting debate on Russian TV in which the various economists and politicians invited to discuss the possible effects on Russia of EU/US sanctions against Russia were all laughing about it and listing the *advantages* which Russia would gain from any western sanctions.  These were their arguments:

1) While speculative capital could leave Russia, most US and EU companies are too heavily invested in Russia to go anywhere.
2) Western companies would probably be more hurt by sanctions than Russian ones.
3) The Kremlin could order additional retaliatory sanctions or even seize assets.
4) Paradoxically, sanctions might soften some of the most negative consequences of the Russian entry into the WTO.
5) As has been the case with Iran and South Africa, sanction might serve as a a stimulus to the growth of segments of the economy which have been neglected until now.
6) Any reduction of Russian gas/oil purchases by the EU and their replacement by US shale gas/oil obtained by fracking would inevitably trigger a rise in the cost of gas/oil which would only benefit Russia.  Besides, Russia needs to use some of this gas to provide it to underdeveloped regions of Russia.
7) The seizure of bank accounts held by Russian politicians in the West would greatly contribute to the Kremlin's campaign to fight corruption and have the Russian money sit aboard be repatriated back to Russia.
8) A ban on visas is a joke and the cancellation of talks with the EU about an visa-free regime between the EU and Russia has been stalled for so many years that it would make no difference.
9) Economic sanctions would also help to accomplish another long term strategic goal of the Kremlin: to dis-entangle Russia from the Western economies and turn its "economic face" to Asia.
10) Most Russian money is in off-shores anyway.  So either this money is safe, and then the sanctions will not affect it, or it will be threatened by the sanctions, in which case this is help the Kremlin's campaign of "de-offshorization".

So, amazingly, all the economists and politicians were actually looking forward to the West's sanctions even though most though that it was most unlikely that the West would impose any real sanctions as the western economies are all in deep debt and basically bankrupted by printing fiat money while Russia is awash with cash.

The position of China: for all the media speculation, China will always support Russia against the Ukraine for because Russia can offer China which it most needs: a) energy b) a stable border c) a reliable partner against the US.  Russia also offers a huge market, fantastic weapons for relatively cheap prices, a collaboration against US-controlled insurgencies (Islamists, Uighurs, etc.).  Finally, the Chinese now that it's Maidan today, Tiananmen tomorrow (again!).  So forget the speculation of the western media - that is wishful thinking - China will quietly by reliable support Russia.

I will be gone all of Sunday, but I will be back on Monday.

Take care and have a wonderful week-end everybody, many thanks and kind regards,

The Saker

Saudi-US Relations: "Storms of the Desert"

Next: Why Russia should withdraw from all European organizations
Previous: Ukraine SITREP March 8, 16:29 EST (and a little debunking)
$
0
0
US and Saudi flags

Dr. Ahmad Malli

The Saudi foreign policy is mostly labeled with its dependence on "cautious alertness" and by its nature, it tends to adopt mysteriousness and vagueness, as Saudi diplomacy  usually resorts to secrecy and avoiding confrontation, hence it is very close to equivocation and far from directness.

The Saudi leadership believes that this method is the safest in dealing with its direct regional surrounding which is occupied with conflicts and very far from stability. This is why it has always settled for opening the way for its long-term ally, the United States, to take the initiatives and follow up its agenda in the Middle East under Saudi agreement in most of the cases.

In fact, the Saudi-American relations were established during World War II, and on the 18th of February, 1943, US President Roosevelt announced that "defending Saudi Arabia is vital to the defense of the United States", while the US oil companies have paved the way for the establishment of these relations ten years before Roosevelt announced about them, when "Standard Oil of California" company gained the franchise for drilling for oil in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Followers of Washington-Riyadh relations agree on considering that the meeting between US President Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul Aziz bin Saud on the cruiser "Quincy" during his return from Yalta Summit (February 1945) with Stalin and Churchill established the bases for a strategic deal based on guaranteeing the flow of Saudi oil to the United States and its allies in return for Washington's protection of the Saudi regime.
For the past 70 years, the equation of protection in return for oil with fine prices was implemented. Even though these relations faced some disagreements and tensions, but these cases were not essential. According to Diplomat and former US Ambassador to Riyadh during the first Gulf war, Chas Freeman (1989-1992), who was also known for his strong ties with US foreign policy institutions, he said:"In the past, we've been able to rely on them (Saudis) at a minimum not to oppose US policy, and most often to support it..."


However, these days this harmony no longer exists in the same form and it seems more shaky. Lately, loud complaints by significant Saudi officials were heard because the interests of the strong alliance between the two countries have become at stake. This urged US Secretary of State, John Kerry, to make an urgent visit to Riyadh in November where he met with King Abdullah, Foreign Minister Saud Al-Fayssal, and a number of Saudi officials; but it is doubtful that Kerry had succeeded in putting a limit to this deterioration in the relations between the two countries.

David Ignatius wrote in Washington Post about the crackup in the Saudi-US relations, considering that "it has been on this way for more than two years, like a slow-motion car wreck..." - this includes some exaggeration - however, US researchers go far beyond that as they consider that the state of relations between the two countries have reached is the result of a long path of mutual disappointment, which has started with the end of the cold war and included some harsh stops for both parts. "September 11" was one stop for the Americans, while the Iraq invasion in 2003 and its results - according to the Saudis - like the handover of power there by the George Bush Administration to the Shiite majority, was most likely the greatest strategic relapse for the kingdom in the past decades.

[sa.bmp]
Undoubtedly, Riyadh was not pleased with the Bush Administration's adoption of the call for spreading democracy in the Middle East, as this tackles a sensitive issue for the Saudis. Yet, this call got wide US promotion specially after the "September 11", and by that aversion between the two allies started increasing.

On the regional clash in the east, Iran was the opponent which the Saudis tried to limit its power and put an end to its expansion in a region which they consider of direct closeness.

In Lebanon, the Saudis supported "March 14" alliance to win the parliamentary elections for two consecutive times (2005 and 2009), and their prime concern was to suppress "Hezbollah", Iran's ally which took advantage of the Lebanese balances to win the right of "Veto" in the Lebanese government after Doha agreement.

Later, "March 14" alliance found itself outside the government which was formed by Prime Minister Najib Miqati.

In Iraq, despite all Saudi efforts, they failed to impose their choice of appointing Iyad Allawi as Prime Minister, even though his bloc in the Iraqi parliament was the biggest one. However, his opponent Nouri Al-Maliki, who is close to Tehran, is still in his position since the 2010 elections.

In the Palestinian field, King Abdullah sponsored "Mecca agreement" between "Fatah" and "Hamas", and one of the goals of this agreement was to keep "Hamas" away from Iranian influence. However, the agreement fell within months, after "Hamas" took over power in the Gaza Strip, which made it more attached to its relation with Iran.

All these attempts failed on the regional level. The Saudis have been facing failure since around eight years, while Iran was succeeding, according to US expert on Gulf and Arabian Peninsula Affairs, Gregory Gause.

Following the "Arab Spring" developments at the beginning of 2011 which changed the balance of power in the region, the Saudis did not hide their rage, and their focus was on Egypt more than Tunisia, for the fall of Moubarak was an irreparable loss for the Saudis who considered that his regime had a certain weight which they needed to balance power with the rising Iran.


The gap was expanding more between Riyadh and Obama Administration. The Saudis had serious reasons for their concern from this administration, as in their opinion, it miscalculated the dangers of the "Arab Spring" and its outcomes. Moreover, it does not take into consideration their (Saudi's) benefits when dealing with the developments. The Saudis can never imagine that the destiny of the Bahraini King "Al Khalifa" would be similar to that of Moubarak, because any possible political change in Bahrain would be a loss for Saudi Arabia in the face of Iran; not to mention its direct repercussions on the Shiites in the eastern part of the country who will revolt against Al Saud if the revolution in Bahrain succeeded.

Based on that, the Saudi leadership did not accept the modest US criticisms to the Bahraini authorities' oppression of the peaceful protests by the Shiite majority under Saudi support. The Saudis also felt frustrated from the stances of Obama Administration and found them to be an additional evidence that this administration did not take into consideration the particularity of Bahrain for Saudi Arabia due to its closeness, as it falls only 25 kilometers away from the eastern region.

Meanwhile, the post Moubarak era did not come out with any agreement between the Saudis and the US on Egypt. Instead, the two parts found themselves standing in two opposite locations to the extent that "Stratfor for Intelligence Studies" group put the variance between the two countries on the Egyptian crisis in the context of the Kingdom's deviation from the US policies and the historical track.

Riyadh was surprised with Obama Administration's support to the "Muslim Brotherhood" after the fall of Moubarak and considered it a great sin because of this group's threat to the Saudi Monarchy in case it reached power. This threat is on one hand due to the existence of some radical forces inside the kingdom that support the "Muslim Brotherhood", and on another hand because the "Muslim Brotherhood's" rule in Egypt is a challenge for the Saudis because they present Islam in a different form. On this point, former official at the National Security Council, Denis Ross considered that "Saudi Arabia has two major enemies in the region, they are: The Muslim Brotherhood and Iran".


Therefore, it wasn't surprising that Riyadh and its Gulf state allies stood firmly in support of the temporal Egyptian caretaker government, and when Washington cancelled the military maneuvers with Cairo after Mursi's ouster and cancelled its 1.3 million dollar military aid, the Saudis and their Gulf allies rushed to present a 12 times as much amount aid for Egypt.

Only in Syria, from all the "Arab Spring" countries, where the peaceful protests supported and approved by Riyadh. However, this contradicted with Saudi scholars' Fatwas which prohibited demonstrations and were widely promoted on Saudi media to delegitimize any public movements whether inside the kingdom or outside it, like Bahrain, Yemen, Egypt, and Tunisia, under the claim that these demonstrations cause riot and sabotage public and private properties.

With the transformation of the peaceful protests in Syria to a military insurgence, the kingdom was in the lead of supporting this choice and adopted clearly the call to topple Assad's regime militarily.

It is not hard to know the secret behind the Saudi interest to work with all its power against the regime in Syria. The Saudi leadership had seen that the developments in the country were a historic opportunity to compensate for its consecutive losses during the past decade, specifically what it considered a strategic loss in Iraq for the benefit of Iran. Moreover, it saw that making a change in Syria would turn the regional equation, and Iran would then lose an important fulcrum which would affect its connection with "Hezbollah" in Lebanon and the resistance movements in Palestine. Additionally and most importantly in the Saudi calculations is that they will not be alone in confronting the Assad regime, but rather a number of regional and western countries, on top of which is the United States, will be on their side; not to mention that a Saudi lineup in such a confrontation would trigger the fanaticism of a large group inside Saudi Arabia which will stand by the Saudi ruling family under sectarian slogans: "Supporting the Sunni majority in Syria against the rule of the Alawi minority." This reached the extent that Sheikh Saleh Al-Luhaidan, former Head of the Supreme Judicial Council and the current Advisor at the Royal Bureau, announced (not to say issued a Fatwa) at the beginning of the Syrian protests that it is legitimate to kill third of the Syrian people (nearly eight million) to save the two thirds.

The Saudi leadership found in President Obama's threat against Assad regime over the nuclear attack on Damascus suburbs (last August) the perfect opportunity for a direct American military involvement to topple the regime in Syria. It put a lot of hope on the level President Obama could reach, and the Saudi frustration and bitterness was as far when the Americans and Russians reached an agreement that commits the Syrian regime to get rid of its nuclear arsenal.

Here is where the Saudi loss seemed double, as the nuclear agreement did not only form a lifeline for the Syrian regime from a US strike, but it also made it an international partner, as it was regarded as the local side which will supervise the implementation of the agreement after the grip was tightened around it in the previous phase of the conflict and it was abandoned by many western and regional countries who put President Bashar Al-Assad's withdrawal as the first condition for finding a solution for the Syrian crisis.

After announcing about reaching the Geneva agreement (November 24) on the Iranian nuclear file between P5+1 states and Iran, the Saudi frustration towards Obama Administration reached its utmost. This was not merely related to signing the agreement but to the way it was reached, as it was prepared under complete secrecy by launching side negotiations between the US envoys and their Iranian counterparts through several rounds that lasted eight months before finally signing the agreement in Geneva.

What might have also enraged the Saudi leadership and added to its bitterness was that it found itself like a betrayed husband, as the secret negotiation process between the Americans and the Iranians took place behind their backs. What was more infuriating was that the negotiations were held nearby, specifically in Oman. This country is considered their partner as it is a founding member of the Gulf Cooperation Council. Despite that , neither the US ally nor the Gulf partner bothered to inform the Saudis about the negotiations, they were rather treated like all the other countries.

Translated by Sara Taha Moughnieh

Source: Assafir Newspaper
10-03-2014 - 01:42 Last updated 10-03-201
Viewing all 27504 articles
Browse latest View live