Palestinian Pundit

The Arab Nation Today

The Revelations of Uri Dan

By STEPHEN LENDMAN
CounterPunch

"Longtime and now recently deceased confidant to former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Uri Dan, published a book in France that may have been his 2006 one titled Ariel Sharon: An Intimate Portrait in which he accused the former prime minister of assassinating Palestinian Authority (PA) President Yasser Arafat by poisoning him. Dan claimed Sharon got approval from George Bush by phone early in 2004 to proceed with his plan after he told the US president he was no longer committed to "not" liquidating the Palestinian leader who then was under siege and practically incarcerated in what remained of his Ramallah compound, most of which had already been destroyed by the Israelis in a lawless act of retribution against him.

Based on his record during his tenure as Texas governor, when he authorized more death row inmate executions than any US governor in history (and was called by some the Texecutioner), this revelation should come as no surprise. It's even clearer based on Ariel Sharon's boast once about his relationship with George Bush saying: "We have the US president under our control."

....Continued."

By Kurt Nimmo

".....Bush and crew will likely never face justice, or for that matter the prospect of hooded thugs fitting a rope around their necks. In America, war criminals are allowed to retire and write their memoirs.

Saddam was executed not so much as an act of justice—as if a kangaroo court, installed by an occupation military force, can seriously deliver justice—for the U.S. government does not give a damn about justice for the Iraqi people, or for that matter any other people, but rather the execution of Saddam was engineered to serve as an object lesson to those who would resist the combined interests of the international banker criminal cartel, the think tank neolibs, and their neocon kissing cousins who serve the interests of the Likudniks in Israel, with plenty of profitable spillover for the military-industrial-intelligence complex, a behemothic monster over shadowing the threat Dwight Eisenhower warned us about as he left office on January 17, 1961. "

by Linda Milazzo

"Tonight in Dearborn Michigan, Iraqi expatriates have taken to the streets to celebrate the hanging of Saddam Hussein. As a non-Iraqi who values the lives of the people living in Iraq today, I have a message for these celebrants:

If you truly believe, as you have stated to American media, that Saddam's hanging justifies the deaths of 650,000 innocent Iraqis under the regime of George W. Bush, you are neither lovers of Iraq nor lovers of Iraqis.

Shame on you!

The death of one man cannot justify the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi men, women and children who survived Saddam, but perished under George W. Bush.

Shame on you for celebrating in the safety of your comfortable Michigan neighborhoods while the people still living in your "beloved homeland" are subjected to car bombs, abduction and torture every day.

As you celebrate your retribution, do so visualizing the faces of your dead and maimed compatriots who have perished since March 20, 2003... all of whom would have preferred an internationally subdued, monitored and intact Iraq under Saddam Hussein, to the violence and anarchy in Iraq under George W. Bush.

If you believe for one minute that Saddam's death justifies the demise of the infrastructure of Iraq. If you believe for one minute that Saddam's death justifies the sectarian violence in Iraq. If you believe for one minute that Saddam's death justifies the current hell of "your" people in Iraq... then trade places with them.

Give them your comfortable homes in Michigan and take their destroyed homes and lives in Iraq. Perhaps then you will stop your celebration and consider the hell they will live through tomorrow even after the death of Saddam.

Millions of Iraqis suffered under the regime of Saddam Hussein. If you or your loved ones were victims of his cruelty, I am sorry. I understand and accept your hatred for him. But to celebrate the current state of turmoil in Iraq for even one night is neither humane nor patriotic to me."

The Question is:

How Do You Consider Executing Saddam On The First Day Of Eid Al-Adha?

With Over 3,200 Responses, Here Are The Opinions:

It Was An Insult..........................93.3%

Cause For Rejoicing By His Victims...3.7%

It Was A Normal Judicial Matter...... 3.1%

'In this Arpil 24, 2003 file photo, the remains of an Iraqi person is seen in the process of being unearthed at the bottom of a makeshift grave, at a formerly off-limits government cemetery for those who were 'disappeared' by Saddam Hussein's regime and which opened to Iraqi citizens after Hussein was overthrown by the U.S., in the Abu Ghraib suburb of Baghdad. Saddam was executed by the new Iraqi government Saturday Dec. 30, 2006, after a court convicted and sentenced him to death for his role in the murders of 148 Shiite Muslims from Dujail. (AP Photo/Brennan Linsley)':

The hanging of Saddam Hussein was something truly historic--Arabs have never seen anything like it.

First, let me say that I am 100% against the death penalty--even for war criminals. There is something truly barbaric about a government--any government that engages in premeditated murder.

Second, I thought the hanging of Saddam only shined a giant spotlight on the hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy in the region. For many Arabs the execution of Saddam is bittersweet. Saddam was executed after a trial for ordering the killing of 100+ Iraqis in Dujail, but Palestinians and other Arabs cannot help but notice that no matter how many Palestinians are slaughtered by the Israeli Occupation Forces that the US will never take a principled stand in regards to Israel. Never. As a result many Arabs see the hanging as the racist and bigoted brutality of US foreign policy. The US is a country that suppresses even the slightest condemnation of Israel at the United Nations when Israel engages in the wanton slaughter of a civilian population.

Hypocrisy and bigotry from the US aside, we should not let our anger over US foreign policy blind us to the fact that Saddam was a murderous tyrant.

Iraq: State of the Evidence: Photographs: Mass Graves and Documentary Evidence of Crimes from Saddam Hussein's Regime.

Another group that fell victim to Saddam were the Marsh Arabs, they never did anything wrong. They were ethnically cleansed from their land when Saddam Hussein diverted the rivers and drained the habitat of the Marsh Arabs, forcing their exodus. He ended their way of living, a civilization that was thousands of years old. See picture of Marsh Arab children:


And to the Palestinians who will look back with nostalgia at the "superior" treatment of Palestinians by Saddam--let me remind you that under Saddam Palestinians were not able to own property or become citizens of the state. He only treated them slightly better than other Arab tyrants treat the Palestinians.

اعتبرت توقيته استهتاراً بكل القيم الإسلامية والعربية

"غزة - المركز الفلسطيني للإعلام

اعتبرت حركة المقاومة الإسلامية "حماس" إعدام الرئيس العراقي السابق صدام حسين بأنها جريمة إعدام سياسي، فرضتها الإدارة الأمريكية عبر الحكومة العراقية، مؤكدة أنها "جاءت مخالفة لكل الأعراف والمواثيق الدولية، ومخالفة لوثيقة جنيف الرابعة المتعلقة بمعاملة أسرى الحرب".

وقالت الحركة في بيان لها؛ "إنّ جريمة اغتيال صدام حسين جاءت في توقيت مدروس يستهدف النيل من العرب والمسلمين، فالقضية بالنسبة لنا، ليست دفاعاً عن صدام حسين، وإنما دفاعاً عن الكرامة العربية والمشاعر الإنسانية التي يُستهان بها".

وأضافت إن "جريمة الاغتيال التي ارتكبت، فجر اليوم السبت، في أول أيام عيد الأضحى المبارك هي استهتار بكل القيم الإسلامية والعربية، وما كان للإعدام أن يُنفّذ لولا الهوان العربي والإسلامي".

وأشارت "حماس" إلى أنه "لو كان صدام قد ارتكب أي جريمة؛ فكان الأولى أن يحاكمه شعبه لا أن يحاكمه المحتل الأمريكي، الذي يجب أن يُحاكَم على الجرائم التي ارتكبت وترتكب كل يوم على يديه في العراق وفلسطين وأفغانستان وغيرها من بقاع الأرض".

من جهته؛ قال إسماعيل رضوان، المتحدث باسم "حماس" إن الإدارة الأمريكية أرادت من خلال تنفيذ حكم الإعدام بصدام "خلق حالة من الاحباط والضغط على نفوس الجماهير العربية والإسلامية في أول أيام عيد الأضحى المبارك".

وأوضح أن هذا "الاستكبار العالمي الذي تقوده أمريكا الظالمة لن يدوم طويلاً، ولن يعمر طويلاً أمام صمود وثبات ومقاومة أبناء الشعوب العربية والإسلامية"، مؤكداً أن إعدام صدام اليوم "يمثل صفعة للأنظمة الهزيلة التي تأبى إلا أن تبقى خاضعة للهيمنة والسيطرة الأمريكية في المنطقة".

وتساءل رضوان "من سيحاكم الإدارة الأمريكية ضد ما ارتكبته من جرائم ضد أبناء شعبنا الفلسطيني والشعوب العربية والإسلامية في أفغانستان والعراق وفلسطين؟"، موضحا أن "أيادي الإدارة الأمريكية ملطخة بالدماء إلى جانب الفظائع التي تقوم في سجن أبو غريب وغوانتنامو"، مطالباً بمحاكمة هذه الإدارة لتنال عقابها". "

"What is this?

AFSC urges peace supporters to organize events in their hometowns the day after the 3,000th U.S. military death in Iraq is announced.

Together, we'll mourn all the lives lost in this war and call for the troops to come home.

There are currently
243 events planned in 44 states and counting... "

By Mike Whitney

"The execution of Saddam Hussein is another grim chapter in the catalogue of war crimes perpetrated against the Iraqi people. It is a gratuitous act of barbarism devoid of justice.

What right does Bush have to kill Saddam? What right does the author of Abu Ghraib, Falluja, Haditha and countless other atrocities have to pass judgment on the former leader of a nation which posed no threat to the United States?

Let’s be clear, the lowliest, most ruthless Iraqi has more right to rule Iraq than the most upright American. That’s what’s meant by “self determination”. When we honor “self rule” we avoid bloody interventions like the invasion of Iraq.

Bush believes that killing Saddam will achieve the “closure” which has eluded him through 4 years of occupation. But he is mistaken. Saddam’s death will only eliminate any opportunity for a political solution. Reconciliation will be impossible and Saddam will die as a hero.

Is that what Bush wants?

Or does Bush really know what he wants? Perhaps, he is just a war-mongering psychopath completely disconnected from reality.

Capital punishment is a moral evil. The state never has the right to kill its own people regardless of their crimes; Saddam is no exception. But the premeditated murder of Saddam is particularly appalling, because it is stupid as well as unjust. It cuts off dialogue with the very people (the Ba’athist-led resistance) who need to be entered into the political process to achieve normalization. Bush is destroying his last chance for a negotiated settlement and paving the way for America’s total defeat.

It’s complete madness.

The Iraqi Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, told the Times Online that “the deposed president could be hanged ‘within hours’” and that his death sentence would be executed by Saturday at the latest.

Munir Haddad, the presiding judge on the appeals court, said, “All the measures have been done. There is no reason for delays.”

Plans are already underway to film the entire event.

It’s impossible to imagine a more fitting summary of 6 years of Bush rule than video-footage of Saddam’s limp figure dangling at the end of a rope. The pictures will no doubt replace the iconic photos of the hooded Abu Ghraib prisoner who appeared in headlines across the world.

The United States will pay a heavy price for Bush’s savagery. The war is already going badly and this latest travesty will only quicken America’s inevitable withdrawal.

America has become a moral swamp, its leaders incapable of wisdom or mercy. Hanging Saddam only adds to our mutual disgrace and exposes the real face of American justice."

What's Good for Saddam May Be Good for Mubarak or the Saudi Royals

By TARIQ ALI
CounterPunch

"It was symbolic that 2006 ended with a colonial hanging--- most of it (bar the last moments) shown on state television in occupied Iraq. It has been that sort of year in the Arab world. After a trial so blatantly rigged that even Human Rights Watch---the largest single unit of the US Human Rights industry--- had to condemn it as a total travesty. Judges were changed on Washington's orders; defense lawyers were killed and the whole procedure resembled a well-orchestrated lynch mob. Where Nuremberg was a more dignified application of victor's justice, Saddam's trial has, till now, been the crudest and most grotesque. The Great Thinker President's reference to it 'as a milestone on the road to Iraqi democracy' as clear an indication as any that Washington pressed the trigger.

The contemptible leaders of the European Union, supposedly hostile to capital punishment, were silent, as usual. And while some Shia factions celebrated in Baghdad, the figures published by a fairly independent establishment outfit, the Iraq Centre for Research and Strategic Studies (its self-description: "which attempts to spread the conscious necessity of realizing basic freedoms, consolidating democratic values and foundations of civil society") reveal that just under 90 per cent of Iraqis feel the situation in the country was better before it was occupied.

The ICRSC research is based on detailed house-to-house interviewing carried out during the third week of November 2006.
Only five per cent of those questioned said Iraq is better today than in 2003; 89 per cent of the people said the political situation had deteriorated; 79 per cent saw a decline in the economic situation; 12 per cent felt things had improved and 9 per cent said there was no change. Unsurprisingly, 95 per cent felt the security situation was worse than before. Interestingly, about 50 per cent of those questioned identified themselves only as "Muslims"; 34 per cent as Shiites and 14 per cent as Sunnis. Add to this the figures supplied by the UNHCR: 1.6 million Iraqis (7 per cent of the population) have fled the country since March 2003 and 100,000 Iraqis leave every month, Christians, doctors, engineers, women, etc. There are one million in Syria, 750,000 in Jordan, 150,000 in Cairo. These are refugees that do not excite the sympathy of Western public opinion, since the US (and EU backed) occupation is the cause. These are not compared (as was the case in Kosovo) to the atrocities of the Third Reich. Perhaps it was these statistics (and the estimates of a million Iraqi dead) that necessitated the execution of Saddam Hussein?

That Saddam was a tyrant is beyond dispute, but what is conveniently forgotten is that most of his crimes were committed when he was a staunch ally of those who now occupy the country. It was, as he admitted in one of his trial outbursts, the approval of Washington (and the poison gas supplied by West Germany) that gave him the confidence to douse Halabja with chemicals in the midst of the Iran-Iraq war. He deserved a proper trial and punishment in an independent Iraq. Not this. The double standards applied by the West never cease to astonish. Indonesia's Suharto who presided over a mountain of corpses (At least a million to accept the lowest figure) was protected by Washington. He never annoyed them as much as Saddam.

And what of those who have created the mess in Iraq today? The torturers of Abu Ghraib; the pitiless butchers of Fallujah; the ethnic cleansers of Baghdad, the Kurdish prison boss who boasts that his model is Guantanamo. Will Bush and Blair ever be tried for war crimes? Doubtful. And Aznar, currently employed as a lecturer at Georgetown University in Washington, DC , where the language of instruction is English of which he doesn't speak a word. His reward is a punishment for the students.

Saddam's hanging might send a shiver through the collective, if artificial, spine of the Arab ruling elites. If Saddam can be hanged, so can Mubarak, or the Hashemite joker in Amman or the Saudi royals, as long as those who topple them are happy to play ball with Washington."

December deadliest month for U.S. in Iraq in 2 yrs

"BAGHDAD, Dec 30 (Reuters) - December became the deadliest month for U.S. troops in Iraq in two years after the U.S. military reported six more combat deaths, leaving the tally just two short of the emotive 3,000 mark.

Three U.S. marines died on Thursday from wounds suffered in combat in Iraq's western Anbar province. One soldier was killed by a roadside bomb in northwest Baghdad and another soldier was killed in Anbar on Friday, the military said on Saturday.

Another statement announced the death of a U.S. soldier killed by a roadside bomb in southwest Baghdad on Friday.

The latest deaths take the number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq since the invasion of March 2003 to 2,998, according to icasualties.org, a Web site that tracks U.S. deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The number who died in December is now 109, three more than the previous high this year in October, and the highest since November 2004 when 137 U.S. servicemen and women died.

Mounting U.S. casualties are raising pressure on U.S. President George W. Bush to set a timetable for the withdrawal of troops from the increasingly unpopular war. "

***

The Worst May Still Be Coming.

By Robert Scheer

"It is a very frightening precedent that the United States can invade a country on false pretenses, depose its leader and summarily execute him without an international trial or appeals process. This is about vengeance, not justice, for if it were the latter the existing international norms would have been observed. The trial should have been overseen by the World Court, in a country that could have guaranteed the safety of defense lawyers, who, in this case, were killed or otherwise intimidated.

The irony here is that the crimes for which Saddam Hussein was convicted occurred before the United States, in the form of Donald Rumsfeld, embraced him. Those crimes were well known to have occurred 15 months before Rumsfeld visited Iraq to usher in an alliance between the United States and Saddam to defeat Iran.

The fact is that Saddam Hussein knew a great deal about the United States’ role in Iraq, including deals made with Bush’s father. This rush to execute him had the feel of a gangster silencing the key witness to a crime.

At Nuremberg in the wake of World War II the U.S. set the bar very high by declaring that even the Nazis, who had committed the most heinous of crimes, should have a fair trial. The U.S. and allies insisted on this not to serve those charged, but to educate the public through a believable accounting. In the case of Saddam, the bar was lowered to the mud, with the proceedings turned into a political circus reminiscent of Stalin’s show trials."

(Click on cartoon to enlarge)
By Mr. Fish

The Independent

"John Scarlett, who took responsibility for the error-ridden dossier that justified the war in Iraq, is knighted in today's New Year's Honours list. The award will enrage peace campaigners, who have accused the veteran spymaster of saving Tony Blair's skin over the flawed case for the invasion.

The news came as a British soldier was killed by a roadside bomb in Basra yesterday, the 127th to die since the invasion in 2003.

Sir John, the head of MI6, played a key role in the Hutton Inquiry hearings into the death of the weapons expert David Kelly, three years ago. He steadfastly defended the dossier, which contained the notorious claim that Iraq could launch weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes. And he dismissed accusations he had bowed to pressure to "sex up" the document's conclusions.

As chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, he told the inquiry he had "overall charge and responsibility" for the dossier.

Sir John allowed last-minute changes that had the effect of strengthening its conclusions, leading Lord Hutton to suggest that he could have been "subconsciously influenced" by his political masters.

One crucial alteration was to cut the observation that Saddam Hussein was more likely to use chemical and biological weapons defensively than offensively - a change was made after Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff, said the passage could pose "a problem" that could be seized on by anti-war critics.

Sir John insisted the amendment "was not as a result of the intervention from Downing Street"."

***

Ah, The Standards Of The Civilized West!

"BAGHDAD, Dec. 29 (UPI) -- About 90 percent of Iraqis feel the situation in the country was better before the U.S.-led invasion than it is today, according to a new ICRSS poll.

The findings emerged after house-to-house interviews conducted by the ICRSS during the third week of November. About 2,000 people from Baghdad (82 percent), Anbar and Najaf (9 percent each) were randomly asked to express their opinion. Twenty-four percent of the respondents were women.

Only five percent of those questioned said Iraq is better today than in 2003. While 89 percent of the people said the political situation had deteriorated, 79 percent saw a decline in the economic situation; 12 percent felt things had improved and 9 percent said there was no change. Predictably, 95 percent felt the security situation was worse than before.

The results of the poll conducted by the Iraq Centre for Research and Strategic Studies and shared with the Gulf Research Center, has a margin error of +/- 3.1 percent.

The ICRSS is an independent institution "which attempts to spread the conscious necessity of realizing basic freedoms, consolidating democratic values and foundations of civil society."

Nearly 50 percent of the respondents identified themselves only as "Muslims"; 34 percent were Shiites and 14 percent, Sunnis."

They Were Afraid Of Him Even In His Death
A U.S. Death Squad Carried Out The Orders Of The Executioner-In-Chief

The Hangman And Executioner-In-Chief

The US-backed invasion of Somalia to topple its Islamists is a dangerous, illegal act of aggression

Salim Lone
(Salim Lone was UN spokesman in Iraq in 2003 and is a columnist for the Daily Nation in Kenya)
Saturday December 30, 2006
The Guardian

"Undeterred by the horrors and disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, the Bush administration has opened another battlefront in the Muslim world. With US backing, Ethiopian troops have invaded Somalia in an illegal war of aggression. But this brazen US-sponsored bid to topple the popular Islamists who had brought Somalia its first peace and security in 16 years has already begun to backfire. Looting has forced the transitional government to declare a state of emergency. Clan warlords, who had terrorised Somalia until they were driven out by the Islamists this year, have begun carving up the city once again. And the African Union, which helped create the transitional government, has called for the immediate withdrawal of Ethiopian forces from the country, as did Kenya, a close US and Ethiopian ally.

They had little choice: the invasion was a clear violation of international law and a UN security council resolution, which the US itself pushed through earlier this month, that explicitly forbade troops from any neighbouring country from joining even the new peace-keeping force it authorised for Somalia. That still did not prevent the Bush administration from issuing a strong statement of support for the Ethiopian offensive.

As with Iraq in 2003, the US has cast this as a war to curtail terrorism. The real goal of course is to gain a direct foothold in another highly strategic and oil rich region by installing a client regime in Somalia. The US had already been violating the UN arms embargo on Somalia by supporting the warlords who drove out the UN peace-keepers in 1993 by killing 18 US soldiers, in order to push out the Islamists. That effort failed and an Ethiopian invasion remained the only way to oust a group with popular support. All independent experts warned against such a war, saying it would destabilise the region.

Ethiopia itself is highly unstable. Thought of as a Christian nation, it has a sizeable Muslim population which has begun to assert itself after marginalisation in the power structure. Prime Minister Meles Zenawi heads a dictatorial regime which has held on to power with US support after losing last year's elections. But this war, unlike its conflict with Eritrea, will not unify the country behind Meles.

To achieve its goals, the US once again ensnared the UN security council, which cravenly adopted a resolution which will further cement its reputation as an anti-Muslim body. It authorised a regional peace-keeping force to enter Somalia to protect the weak and isolated transitional government and "restore peace and stability". But all major international news organisations had reported that the country experienced this year its first respite from the utter lawlessness and terror that prevailed since 1991. A multilateral force was suddenly deemed necessary only because it was the Islamists that had brought about this stability - and they had done so not through violence but primarily through rallying people to their side by creating law and order through the application of sharia law, which Somalis universally practise.

The Islamists are not angels. But their collective pool of terror acts is dwarfed by the terrorism of the warlords that the US has been supporting in blatant violation of the UN arms embargo.

The US has every right to be concerned about terror. But the best anti-dote to terrorism in Somalia is stability, which the Union of Islamic Courts provided. The Islamists have strong public support, which has grown in the face of US and Ethiopian interventions. As in other Muslim-western conflicts, the way to secure peace is to engage with the Islamists to ensure that they have no reason to turn to terror. "

By Robert Fisk

"....But history will record that the Arabs and other Muslims and, indeed, many millions in the West, will ask another question this weekend, a question that will not be posed in other Western newspapers because it is not the narrative laid down for us by our presidents and prime ministers - what about the other guilty men?

No, Tony Blair is not Saddam. We don't gas our enemies. George W Bush is not Saddam. He didn't invade Iran or Kuwait. He only invaded Iraq. But hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians are dead - and thousands of Western troops are dead - because Messrs Bush and Blair and the Spanish Prime Minister and the Italian Prime Minister and the Australian Prime Minister went to war in 2003 on a potage of lies and mendacity and, given the weapons we used, with great brutality.

In the aftermath of the international crimes against humanity of 2001 we have tortured, we have murdered, we have brutalised and killed the innocent - we have even added our shame at Abu Ghraib to Saddam's shame at Abu Ghraib - and yet we are supposed to forget these terrible crimes as we applaud the swinging corpse of the dictator we created.

Who encouraged Saddam to invade Iran in 1980, which was the greatest war crime he has committed for it led to the deaths of a million and a half souls? And who sold him the components for the chemical weapons with which he drenched Iran and the Kurds? We did. No wonder the Americans, who controlled Saddam's weird trial, forbad any mention of this, his most obscene atrocity, in the charges against him.....

And the mass killings we perpetrated in 2003 with our depleted uranium shells and our "bunker buster" bombs and our phosphorous, the murderous post-invasion sieges of Fallujah and Najaf, the hell-disaster of anarchy we unleashed on the Iraqi population in the aftermath of our "victory" - our "mission accomplished" - who will be found guilty of this? Such expiation as we might expect will come, no doubt, in the self-serving memoirs of Blair and Bush, written in comfortable and wealthy retirement......

But that is not how the Arab world will see him. At first, those who suffered from Saddam's cruelty will welcome his execution. Hundreds wanted to pull the hangman's lever. So will many other Kurds and Shia outside Iraq welcome his end. But they - and millions of other Muslims - will remember how he was informed of his death sentence at the dawn of the Eid al-Adha feast, which recalls the would-be sacrifice by Abraham, of his son, a commemoration which even the ghastly Saddam cynically used to celebrate by releasing prisoners from his jails. "Handed over to the Iraqi authorities," he may have been before his death. But his execution will go down - correctly - as an American affair and time will add its false but lasting gloss to all this - that the West destroyed an Arab leader who no longer obeyed his orders from Washington, that, for all his wrongdoing (and this will be the terrible get-out for Arab historians, this shaving away of his crimes) Saddam died a "martyr" to the will of the new "Crusaders".

When he was captured in November of 2003, the insurgency against American troops increased in ferocity. After his death, it will redouble in intensity again."

Will Bush Be Tried And Convicted?

A nation soaked in blood tears itself apart

By Patrick Cockburn
The Independent
Published: 29 December 2006

"....After the horrors of this year, Sunni and Shia will hardly be able to co-operate closely in future. The sense of Iraqi identity may have been damaged beyond repair. But, more than most states, Iraq is dominated by its capital and Shia and Sunni will continue to fight to rule Baghdad until they either win or know there is no hope of victory."

James Brooks, The Electronic Intifada, 29 December 2006

"The recent "peace" overtures between Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Abbas do not promise significantly improved conditions for Palestinians or an end to the Israeli occupation. More likely results include intensified efforts to split the Palestinian public and undermine their legally elected government......

......If Mr. Abbas were sincerely interested in forming a national unity government with Hamas, he would not have sold their prisoners of state so cheaply. Had he been truly committed to democracy last March, he would have led his defeated party into loyal opposition in the newly elected Hamas government. By closing ranks with Hamas, Abbas and Fateh could have shown the world that Palestinians would obey their own constitution, work out their own issues, and would not be prey to outside interference or blockades.

Instead, he set out to commandeer the PA's security forces and led Fateh into the disloyal opposition they have maintained to this day. Lately he has taken the PA into new constitutional territory by claiming the unilateral power to call new elections. His Fateh-packed Supreme Court recently declared that decisions made by the current PLC are "null and void". Fortified by a significant new supply of US weapons and training, Mr. Abbas appears dangerously close to usurping both the Palestinian constitution and the will of the people by pretending to be the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian Authority.

In following this course, Mr. Abbas has made himself available to external forces that wish to make him the ultimate spoiler of last January's free and fair elections. The ultimate goal of these parties, Israel foremost among them, may be to trigger Palestinian civil war and fatally split the Palestinians' national solidarity, their key to survival. Perhaps to this end, the myth that Israel has "no partner for peace" is being transformed into the myth that Israel has "only one partner for peace", one that, under present conditions, cannot claim to represent the Palestinian people."

By Kurt Nimmo

".....Most recently, the “surge” concept—basically, throwing more troops into the Iraqi meat grinder—was tweaked by the neocon Frederick Kagan, brother of Robert Kagan, sidekick of top drawer neocon Bill Kristol, “resident scholar” at the American Enterprise Institute, where Bush gets his “minds,” and member in good standing over at the Council on Foreign Relations, the neolib coven. Kagan has teamed up with retired Army General Jack Keane, a former member of the neocon infested Defense Policy Board and director over at the death merchant General Dynamics, and they spelled out their version of the “surge” on the pages of the CIA’s favorite newspaper, the Washington Post.....

.....Obviously, in order to tell the truth, one has to be far away from the whorehouse, that is to say the halls of Congress, White House conference rooms, and the inner offices of the State Department. Recall Colin Powell, who fondly refers to Kristol and the neocons as “fucking crazies,” on December 17 telling CBS that a troop increase “cannot be sustained.” In short, Bush’s “surge” will be a disaster, but then the neocons deal in disaster, as their master plan is to use up the U.S. military in an effort to destroy the Arab and Muslim Middle East, as the Israelis demand.

“A faction [more specifically, a neocon faction] in the Pentagon among the U.S. commanders in Iraq has been promoting the surge option to useful journalists such as Michael Gordon of the New York Times. In the Pentagon itself, sentiment is against the ’surge,’ at least if you want to believe a report in the Washington Post. In the Pentagon, they know there are no troops available, making people serve longer tours promotes mutiny, and 30,000 more troops would make no difference,” notes the San Francisco Chronicle (see previous link).

But then the neocons running the Iraq “war” are not interested in making a difference—they are primarily concerned with working up a violent lather that ultimately splits the nation into at least three distinct pieces. As well, they need troops positioned for the spillover effect of the coming attack against Iran, on tap before the unitary decider exits office, or rather steps off the throne, as he was not elected in the first place. "

Palestinian Democracy, Condoleezza Style

"Nazareth – American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Israel's Strategic Affairs Minister Avigdor Lieberman in Washington this month that Israel must "choke off" Hamas, the Hebrew newspaper Ma'ariv reported.

She added that it is necessary to strengthen Palestinian Authority (PA) chairman Mahmoud Abbas in advance of a possible all-out war between militias of the rival Hamas and Fatah factions.

Israeli media reported Thursday that the government approved a shipment of a large number of weapons and ammunition for Abbas's Presidential Guard militia of about 5,000 elite fighters, but he has denied the report."

“I have come to the conclusion that this is no longer America’s war in Iraq, but the Iraqi civil war where America is fighting,” Major Voorhies said.

For Maj. William Voorhies, the American commander of the military training unit at the scene, the moment encapsulated his increasingly frustrating task — trying to build up Iraqi security forces who themselves are being used as proxies in a spreading sectarian war. This time, it was a Sunni politician — Vice Prime Minister Salam al-Zubaie — but the more powerful Shiites interfered even more often.

A two-day reporting trip accompanying Major Voorhies’s unit and combat troops seemed to back his statement, as did other commanding officers expressing similar frustration.

“I have personally witnessed about a half-dozen of these incidents of what I would call political pressure, where a minister or someone from a minister’s office contacts one of these Iraqi commanders,” said Lt. Col. Steven Miska, the deputy commander for the Dagger Brigade Combat Team, First Infantry Division, who oversees combat operations in a wide swath of western Baghdad.

“These politicians are connected with either the militias or Sunni insurgents.”

Whatever plan the Bush administration unveils — a large force increase, a withdrawal or something in between — this country’s security is going to be left in the hands of Iraqi forces. Those forces, already struggling with corruption and infiltration, have shown little willingness to stand up to political pressure.

“I believe everyone, to some extent, is influenced by the militias,” Colonel Miska said. “While some Iraqi security forces may be complicit with the militias, others fear for their families when confronting the militia, and that is the more pervasive threat.”


continued...

Israeli security forces killed 660 Palestinians in 2006 - three times more than in 2005, according to an Israeli human rights group.

B'Tselem, which monitors human rights in the occupied territories, said the figure included 141 children.

At least 322 had taken no part in hostile acts, the group said.

In the same period, the number of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israelis has fallen - 23 Israelis were killed in 2006 compared with 50 last year.

The Israeli military renewed ground operations in the Gaza Strip after militants captured an Israeli soldier in a border raid in June.

Since June, Israeli troops have killed about 405 Palestinians in Gaza, including 88 children. More than half of the casualties were civilians, B'Tselem said.

As of November, 9,075 Palestinians were being held in Israeli jails. This number included 345 minors, it said.

Of these, 738 (22 minors) were being detained without trial and without knowing the charges against them, the group said.

End of Another Year...

"....2006 has been, decidedly, the worst year yet. No- really. The magnitude of this war and occupation is only now hitting the country full force. It's like having a big piece of hard, dry earth you are determined to break apart. You drive in the first stake in the form of an infrastructure damaged with missiles and the newest in arms technology, the first cracks begin to form. Several smaller stakes come in the form of politicians like Chalabi, Al Hakim, Talbani, Pachachi, Allawi and Maliki. The cracks slowly begin to multiply and stretch across the once solid piece of earth, reaching out towards its edges like so many skeletal hands. And you apply pressure. You surround it from all sides and push and pull. Slowly, but surely, it begins coming apart- a chip here, a chunk there.

That is Iraq right now. The Americans have done a fine job of working to break it apart. This last year has nearly everyone convinced that that was the plan right from the start. There were too many blunders for them to actually have been, simply, blunders. The 'mistakes' were too catastrophic. The people the Bush administration chose to support and promote were openly and publicly terrible- from the conman and embezzler Chalabi, to the terrorist Jaffari, to the militia man Maliki. The decisions, like disbanding the Iraqi army, abolishing the original constitution, and allowing militias to take over Iraqi security were too damaging to be anything but intentional.

The question now is, but why? I really have been asking myself that these last few days. What does America possibly gain by damaging Iraq to this extent? I'm certain only raving idiots still believe this war and occupation were about WMD or an actual fear of Saddam.

Al Qaeda? That's laughable. Bush has effectively created more terrorists in Iraq these last 4 years than Osama could have created in 10 different terrorist camps in the distant hills of Afghanistan. Our children now play games of 'sniper' and 'jihadi', pretending that one hit an American soldier between the eyes and this one overturned a Humvee.

This last year especially has been a turning point. Nearly every Iraqi has lost so much. So much. There's no way to describe the loss we've experienced with this war and occupation. There are no words to relay the feelings that come with the knowledge that daily almost 40 corpses are found in different states of decay and mutilation. There is no compensation for the dense, black cloud of fear that hangs over the head of every Iraqi. Fear of things so out of ones hands, it borders on the ridiculous- like whether your name is 'too Sunni' or 'too Shia'. Fear of the larger things- like the Americans in the tank, the police patrolling your area in black bandanas and green banners, and the Iraqi soldiers wearing black masks at the checkpoint.

Again, I can't help but ask myself why this was all done? What was the point of breaking Iraq so that it was beyond repair? Iran seems to be the only gainer. Their presence in Iraq is so well-established, publicly criticizing a cleric or ayatollah verges on suicide. Has the situation gone so beyond America that it is now irretrievable? Or was this a part of the plan all along? My head aches just posing the questions.

What has me most puzzled right now is: why add fuel to the fire? Sunnis and moderate Shia are being chased out of the larger cities in the south and the capital. Baghdad is being torn apart with Shia leaving Sunni areas and Sunnis leaving Shia areas- some under threat and some in fear of attacks. People are being openly shot at check points or in drive by killings… Many colleges have stopped classes. Thousands of Iraqis no longer send their children to school- it's just not safe.

Why make things worse by insisting on Saddam's execution now? Who gains if they hang Saddam? Iran, naturally, but who else? There is a real fear that this execution will be the final blow that will shatter Iraq. Some Sunni and Shia tribes have threatened to arm their members against the Americans if Saddam is executed. Iraqis in general are watching closely to see what happens next, and quietly preparing for the worst.

This is because now, Saddam no longer represents himself or his regime. Through the constant insistence of American war propaganda, Saddam is now representative of all Sunni Arabs (never mind most of his government were Shia). The Americans, through their speeches and news articles and Iraqi Puppets, have made it very clear that they consider him to personify Sunni Arab resistance to the occupation. Basically, with this execution, what the Americans are saying is "Look- Sunni Arabs- this is your man, we all know this. We're hanging him- he symbolizes you." And make no mistake about it, this trial and verdict and execution are 100% American. Some of the actors were Iraqi enough, but the production, direction and montage was pure Hollywood (though low-budget, if you ask me).

That is, of course, why Talbani doesn't want to sign his death penalty- not because the mob man suddenly grew a conscience, but because he doesn't want to be the one who does the hanging- he won't be able to travel far away enough if he does that.

Maliki's government couldn't contain their glee. They announced the ratification of the execution order before the actual court did. A few nights ago, some American news program interviewed Maliki's bureau chief, Basim Al-Hassani who was speaking in accented American English about the upcoming execution like it was a carnival he'd be attending. He sat, looking sleazy and not a little bit ridiculous, his dialogue interspersed with 'gonna', 'gotta' and 'wanna'... Which happens, I suppose, when the only people you mix with are American soldiers.

My only conclusion is that the Americans want to withdraw from Iraq, but would like to leave behind a full-fledged civil war because it wouldn't look good if they withdraw and things actually begin to improve, would it?

Here we come to the end of 2006 and I am sad. Not simply sad for the state of the country, but for the state of our humanity, as Iraqis. We've all lost some of the compassion and civility that I felt made us special four years ago. I take myself as an example. Nearly four years ago, I cringed every time I heard about the death of an American soldier. They were occupiers, but they were humans also and the knowledge that they were being killed in my country gave me sleepless nights. Never mind they crossed oceans to attack the country, I actually felt for them.

Had I not chronicled those feelings of agitation in this very blog, I wouldn't believe them now. Today, they simply represent numbers. 3000 Americans dead over nearly four years? Really? That's the number of dead Iraqis in less than a month. The Americans had families? Too bad. So do we. So do the corpses in the streets and the ones waiting for identification in the morgue.

Is the American soldier that died today in Anbar more important than a cousin I have who was shot last month on the night of his engagement to a woman he's wanted to marry for the last six years? I don't think so.

Just because Americans die in smaller numbers, it doesn't make them more significant, does it?"

With thousands of Palestinians facing starvation, Fatah and Hamas increasingly fought one another in 2006, with the spectre of mass civil strife looming at every turn

By Khaled Amayreh from occupied Palestine
Al-Ahram Weekly

"It is doubtless that 2006 will be viewed by historians as one of the most tumultuous years in the annals of Palestinian history.

On 25 January, legislative elections in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem finally took place after a series of postponements and delays by the Fatah leadership, mainly due to worries that the erstwhile Palestinian Authority (PA) ruling party was not sufficiently prepared for the polls.

The elections were monitored by hundreds of foreign observers, including former US president Jimmy Carter, who testified to their fairness, transparency and democratic nature.

The results of the elections showed that Fatah's fears were vindicated. Hamas won 75 seats of the 132 making up the Palestinian Legislative Council, with Fatah taking only 47, the remainder going to a few independents and a number of small leftist, liberal and secular parties. For Fatah, the outcome represented a humiliating defeat for a movement that ever since its inception in 1965 viewed itself as embodying the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people for freedom and liberation.

Hence, Fatah found it difficult to accept the results, despite public utterances to the contrary. Hamas also seemed to have outperformed itself; never having imagined it would win so many seats. The big gain for Hamas presented a real challenge to what remained essentially a resistance movement that had few connections.....

....Continued."

By Azmi Bishara
Al-Ahram Weekly

"...American democratic evangelism ended because the policy was a complete failure. It failed in Lebanon, which liberated the Arabs from the 1967 complex for the second time, because of all the drastic misjudgements over Israeli might, over the power and resolve of the resistance, and over the feasibility of driving a sectarian wedge into Arab society around a successful anti-Israeli resistance movement -- your average Egyptian couldn't have cared less what kind of turban resistance fighters were wearing or how they held their hands during prayers. The policy failed in Palestine where it had been assumed that foreign pressure would sway the minds of voters in local elections that happened to be more about family connections, corruption, the decrepitude of a movement caught in a struggle between the old guard and fresh blood, and, of course, about patriotic issues and self-determination. In Iraq, this policy along with all others proved a total and unmitigated disaster. The dissolution of the Iraqi army and the dismantlement of the state cast that country back to a Hobbesian "war of all against all," whose participants include the occupying power from overseas and the looming neighbour, and in which the primary motive for life is fear of death. In this anarchy, societal affiliations have become politicised thanks to new leaderships put into place by the occupation regardless of their lack of either a social base or a record of political accomplishment. And by tapping into an abundant source of cheap sectarian capital and feeding the occupier handpicked distorted information, these leaderships have lured the occupation into playing along with their agenda. The result is an epidemic of sectarianism where none had previously existed, an epidemic that is all the more lethal due to the lack of any effective immunity now that the conviction in an overarching Arab identity has been thrown out with the filthy bathwater of the old regime......

.....The current "internal" strife in Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon is a continuation of the clash with Washington's neoconservative administration by other means. In Palestine, the last of the neocons are to be found in the clique surrounding the Palestinian president, which refuses so much as a domestic compromise on the basis of the 4 June 1967 borders. This is the group that insists on meeting US-Israeli conditions, that frowned at the national reconciliation document because it could not serve as a basis for entering into negotiations with Israel, that prayed that the Israeli offensive against Lebanon would teach Hizbullah and all inspired by it a lesson and then lamented the victory of the Lebanese resistance, that wants Europe and the US not to lift the blockade against the elected Palestinian government so as to help it back into power. The remnants of the neoconservatives are still to be found among the 14 March group in Lebanon, who regard the Baker-Hamilton report as a defeat for them, who fear the very thought of a dialogue between the US and Syria and Iran, who rejected a ceasefire during the war on Lebanon before they could be assured that the country could not revert to its pre-12 July conditions, as though they had been the ones to have launched the assault to begin with. The last of the neocons are to be found among the Iraqi forces that restrict even those who could from reining in the militias, who obstruct any possible dialogue with the Baath Party, who have turned national reconciliation conferences into a façade that Bush can use to support his claim that something is moving forward in Iraq, into parleys that succeed in drafting closing statements only because the intent to follow through was never there to begin with, into the type of surgery that can be followed by the pronouncement, "The operation was a success, but the patient died."

....Continued."

By Malcom Lagauche

"......The current scenario just does not make sense. The people who lied through their teeth (Bush, Cheney, Rice, Bremer, Powell, Rumsfeld, et al) and stole tens of billions of dollars that belonged to the country of Iraq, are proudly speaking of creating a new Middle East or conducting booksigning tours for their memoirs. The results of their lies led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis; a cost of about a trillion dollars so far to the U.S. public; and the destruction of a country’s culture and infrastructure. Even the history of Iraq has been re-written by people in Washington D.C.

On the other hand, the guy with the moustache who told the truth about all the lies and adhered to the U.N. request for inspections, as well as supplied a 12,000-page report that documented in detail every aspect of Iraq’s former WMD programs, sits in a jail cell awaiting execution. Something is fundamentally wrong when things can get so far out of hand.

Today, Saddam Hussein is the freest man in Iraq, although he is behind bars. His mind is clear and his integrity is nothing short of incredible. He awaits death with dignity. Not once has he cracked under torture or pressure. Even when offered a "get out of jail free" card by the U.S. if he stopped the resistance, Saddam refused to capitulate.

Other leaders, such as Ghadaffi and Noriega did succumb to U.S. pressure. Ghadaffi, once a revolutionary, today is nothing more than the head inspector of the transfer of his country’s oil to the capitalist giants. He no longer has a grand view of society. He may not be in jail, but he is a slave......"

(Click on to enlarge)
Latuff: We're always hearing about the Israel's right to exist. But, what about the Palestinians? Don't they have the right to exist too? Don't they have the right to live in their own state?

BRING ON THE SURGE

U.S. Deaths In Iraq Are Running At The Highest Level Of The Year, And That Is Before The "Surge." December has seen the death of 107 U.S. troops so far and is already the year's worst month. Happy New Year Mr. Decider!

U.S. Troops Killed In Iraq......2,996

"Coalition" Troops Killed.......3,246

U.S. Troops Wounded.........22,565

Carter's Real Sin is Cutting to the Heart of the Problem

By NORMAN FINKELSTEIN
CounterPunch

"As Jimmy Carter's new book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid climbs the bestseller list, the reaction of Israel's apologists scales new peaks of lunacy. I will examine a pair of typical examples and then look at the latest weapon to silence Carter.

Apartheid Analogy

No aspect of Carter's book has evoked more outrage than its identification of Israeli policy in the Occupied Palestinian Territory with apartheid. Michael Kinsley in the Washington Post called it "foolish and unfair," the Boston Globe editorialized that it was "irresponsibly provocative," while the New York Times reported that Jewish groups condemned it as "dangerous and anti-Semitic." (1)

In fact the comparison is a commonplace among informed commentators.......

...Those sharing Carter's iniquitous belief also include the editorial board of Israel's leading newspaper Haaretz, which observed in September 2006 that "the apartheid regime in the territories remains intact; millions of Palestinians are living without rights, freedom of movement or a livelihood, under the yoke of ongoing Israeli occupation," as well as former Israeli Knesset member Shulamit Aloni, former Israeli Ambassador to South Africa Alon Liel, South African Archbishop and Nobel Laureate for Peace Desmond Tutu and "father" of human rights law in South Africa John Dugard......

...The shrill reaction to Carter's mention of apartheid is probably due not only to the term's emotive resonances but its legal-political implications as well. According to Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions as well as the Statute of the International Criminal Court, "practices of apartheid" constitute war crimes. Small wonder, then, that despite--or, rather, because of--its aptness, Carter is being bullied into repudiating the term.....

...Carter's real sin is that he cut to the heart of the problem: "Peace will come to Israel and the Middle East only when the Israeli government is willing to comply with international law." "

From Ramallah: Dr. Adel Samara
د. عادل سمارة

لمن نستمع نحن العرب، بل العروبيون، فليس كل عربي هو عربي! هل نستمع لتقرير بيكر-هاملتون، أم لتصريحات روبرت جيتس، أم لزيارة جون ابي زيد لإثيوبيا ، أم لتخلي حكام العرب عن السودان: ليدخله وباء جند الإستعمار المعولم ، أم لأقوال أولمرت "أن لا محادثات مع سوريا إلا برضى أميركي". أم نستمع لهذه جميعاً من جهة، أم نسأل التاريخ، والذاكرة والاقتصاد وعقولنا؟
لا جدال في أن ما يصدر عن مركز العولمة مفيد معلوماتياً، حتى لو كان الكثير منه بقصد التضليل، والأكثر منه لا يُقال. فقد يرى البعص في تصريحات جيتس ما يُعاكس أو يرد على تقرير بيكر-هاملتون، أو كأن هذا التقرير هو حالة مهجنة ومركية لرؤية حزبين متعارضين. وقد تكون القراءة الأكثر هدوءاً، أن كله يكمل بعضه بعضاً، وكله في خدمة الطبقة الحاكمة، وفي "الإجتهاد أجر وثواب".
يجدر أن لا يغيب عن البال ان الحزبين الجمهوري والديمقراطي هما حزبان لنفس الطبقة، وليست العلاقة بينهما تقاسم أدوار بقدر ما هي تكامل أداء الوظيفة لأن من ليس في الحكم منهما، هو في المصلحة المشتركة، بمعنى انه حين تم احتلال العراق كان الجمهوريون يخدمون الطبقة الحاكمة في الولايات المتحدة التي يشكل الديمقراطيون جزءا بنيويا عميقا منها.
ودون حديث عميق في تقرير بيكر-هاملتون، فالتقرير ينص بوضوح على غرق جيش الإحتلال في إشكالية الهزيمة في العراق، لكنه لا يتحدث أو ينصح بخروج نهائي من العراق. ربما هو تقرير لإتقاء الخسائر الأكبر والأكثر وهو لإنارة الطريق امام السلطة الأميركية نفسها التي تدير الحرب على العراق.
من ناحية جوهرية، فتقرير بيكر-هاملتون وحديث جيتس يكملان بعضهما البعض. فالعدوان الأميركي على العراق كان من أجل النفط، ولم يجف النفط بعد. وإن المرء ليعجب من اي كاتب لا يبدأ من هنا وينتهي هنا. الحرب في العراق هي تعبئة منابع النفط المنهوب بدم العراقيين والجنود الأميركيين، الأحمر بدل الأسود، تماماً كما يضخون الماء ليخرج الغاز إلى الأعلى. هذه هي المعادلة الإقتصادية البشرية في العراق. وليست رؤيتها بعبقرية، بل كل ما يحتاجه المرء، بعضاً من ضمير ليقول ما يعرف ويفهم ويستنتج. وكل الحذلقات والفذلكات عن سوء فهم عربي غربي، أو خلاف ثقافي أو ديني، أو حتى صراع حضاري، رغم أهمية هذا تحديداً، كل هذا ليس سوى رقص خارج الحلبة.
فطالما أن هناك نفطاً، هناك احتلال. وكما كتبنا في هذه النشرة منذ احتلال بغداد 9 نيسان 2003، بأن الإستعمار يبدأ بالجملة ويخرج بالتدريج، لكنه يخرج، نعم، ظل الاعتقاد نفسه، إنما لا يخرج الإحتلال سريعاً ولا شريفاً.
في كثير من الحالات خلق الاستعمار بدائل محلية له. ولكن في العراق ما زال الأمر صعباً ويبدو أنه يزداد صعوبة يوما بعد يوم، حيث يدرك العراقيون، حتى العملاء منهم، ان الإحتلال جاء ليسحق العميل قبل الأصيل. وأن هذا الإحتلال، لا يثق حتى بعملائه لأن مصالحه لا تثق إلا بجلده. ويبدو ان الاستعمار لفرط أهمية مصالحه لا يثق بمن يبدلون جلودهم!
يحلم الاحتلال بتقاسم الأدوار في العراق، ان تشرف حكومة العملاء على "الأمن" الداخلي، وتشرف قواعد بعيدة ومحمية من جيشه على "الأمن النفطي"، وهو الحلم الذي حالت المقاومة دونه وستحول دونه إلى النهاية لا شك. وهذا ما يتقاطع جداً مع حديث جيتس: "نحن هنا إلى أمد بعيد". فهل من عجب إذن ان نقول كما ذكرنا في هذ النشرة منذ عامين بأن الأميركيين ينوون الاستيطان في العراق؟ ألا ينطوي هذا القول على نهب وسلب وقتل واحتقار؟
ليس هذا خيال شاعر. فقرابة 200 ألف جندي هم اكثر من سكان العديد من بلدان عربية في الخليج. وأكثر من عرب هذه البلدان مجتمعة في السبعينات. وقد يزداد هذا العدد. فهناك 9 ملايين حاملي البطاقة الخضراء في أميركا من مختلف فقراء العالم الذين يحلمون بالجنة الخضراء في أميركا، ويفدونها بدمائهم التي تراق في العراق. ولن يحول دون هذا الاستيطان المصلحي سوى الإنهيار الإقتصادي، بمعنى أن ارواح طالبي البطاقات الخضراء، وحتى دماء حمر الرقاب، لن تثني الطبقة الحاكمة عن الذهب الأسود. فالاستعداد لبذل الأحمر مقابل الأسود لا حدود له، إلا حينما تصبح الصفقة غير مربحة قط. بعبارة أخرى، فالإحتلال ذاهب هناك في صفقة اقتصادية، لديه رصيد هائل من الدم ليسفحه هناك دون حساب، والفقر في العالم كنتاج لراس المال قادر على تزويد أميركا بمزيد من الدم ليسفح في العراق.
ولا شك أن هناك جيوشاً أخرى لأميركا في العراق، ودماء جنودها ليست أثمن من دم حاملي البطاقة الخضراء، سواء في الحكومة العميلة التي يكاد دورها ينحصر في إدارة القتل الداخلي المتبادل بين أهل العراق. وهناك أنظمة مجاورة تخدم الإستيطان النفطي. فمن سوء الطالع للعراق ان الوسط المحيط به ليس مع المقاومة، بل معادٍ لها. وهذا دليل آخر على ألمعية هذه المقاومة بمعنى أنها تصمد في واقع مجافٍ إلى درجة كبيرة.
من اين تبدأ الهزيمة إذن؟ تبدأ من الخسارة الإقتصادية. فالمسألة هي حساب الربح والخسارة ولا قيمة للإنسان فيها، فكيف إذا كان غير واعٍ أو جره فقره إلى حتفه وهو يعلم؟
قبل ستينات القرن الماضي (القرن العشرين كي لا يبدو الزمان بعيداً) كان فائض الميزان التجاري الأميركي 10 مليار دولار. وحتى بداية سبعينات القرن نفسه انعكس الأمر ليصبح مقدار العجز بنفس مقدار الفائض الذي كان في الستينات. وذلك بفضل حرب فيتنام التي لم تنزعج أميركا من كونها حرقت دماء عشرات آلاف الجنود، بل لأنها حرقت عشرات مليارات الدولارات. فأصل اللعبة هو المال أو هو البضائع مترجمة إلى سيولة مالية. اي اصبحت المضارية غير مجدية. ولم يسعف الإقتصاد ألأميركي كونه ألأقوى في العالم وحصته من الإنتاج السلعي العالمي أكثر من 30 بالمئة.
صحيح أن الأزمة الإقتصادية العالمية الممتدة منذ 1973 وحتى اليوم، رغم ما تخللها، من صعود مؤقت مرة هنا وأخرى هناك، لمؤشر معدل الربح، صحيح أنها ضربت المركز كله، والعالم كله، وليس المركز الأميركي وحده، ولكن تاثير هذه الأزمة على الولايات المتحدة كان اعظم. فلم يسعف اقتصادها ما قامت به من طباعة الدولارات وضخها في السوق، ولا إلغاء القاعدة الذهبية وتعويم الدولار. فقد أخذ العدوان على فيتنام يلتهم كل هذا، إلى جانب حواشيه مثل، زيادة المساعدات الأجنبية للدول العميلة والإنفاق على قواعدها وجيوشها في اليابان وجنوب كوريا وتايوان "لمواجهة الشيوعية" رغم أن هذه الجيوش لم تكن منشغلة في حروب.
تكمن أهمية هذه التطورات أنها أهلكت الإنتاج الأميركي المدني، ودفعته للتحول إلى اقتصاد يتركز أكثر في الإنتاج الحربي. بعبارة أخرى، ربما لم تتراجع اميركا من حيث المستوى التكنولوجي بقدر ما جرى تحويل في الدور الإنتاجي من المدني لصالح العسكري. وهذا لا يعني أن الآخرين لم يأخذوا من حصة أميركا من السوق العالمي "المدني". والمهم ان كل هذا قد اضعف الاقتصاد وحوله من حربي إلى مدني. وأخيراً هربت أميركا من فيتنام. لكنها لم تفقد المصلحة الطبقية لحكامها في العدوان من أجل السوق والثروة، ناهيك أن الإقتصاد نفسه لم يكن ليغامر بقاعدتة الإنتاجية التسليحية. ولكن، أيضا، لا يمكن للإنتاج العسكري أن يعوض الخسارة في مبيعات الإنتاج المدني. فالإنتاج المدني مطلوب لكل المليارات، أما العسكري فمطلوب، ولو بالجملة، لبؤر التوتر. لذا ربما نفهم لماذا تدعم أميركا العدوان ألأثيوبي على الصومال وذهاب أبي زيد، إلى هناك. فليس من منطق في القول أن أميركا تخشى حكومة إسلامية في الصومال، في منطقة ليس فيها من سوق قادر على الاستهلاك العالي أو ثروة توجب النهب، ولكن إشعال المنطقة يخلق طلباً على السلاح، وبالتالي فإن ما لم ينفقه الناس على شراء الإنتاج المدني او حتى ما ينفقوه يذهب لشراء لأسلحة. فهل هناك أكثر وحشية من هذه المعادلة التي لا يعرف المرء منها للوهلة الأولى سوى أن أبي زيد زار المنطقة!
لم يكن النفط غائباً عن المعادلة في الستينات والسبعينات. لكنه كان في اليد بفضل الحكومات الوكيلة. وكانت طفرة اسعار النفط التي سحبت من الغرب الراسمالي فوائض هائلة، لتعيدها إليها نفس الأنظمة وإن بطرق شتى. فما الجديد إذن في احتلال العراق؟
ليس هنا موقع الحديث المفصل، لكن العراق كان بلداً له مشروع قومي، ونفط مؤمم، ونفط بدأ يبيعه باليورو. واهم من كل هذا، فقد شهدت الثمانينات والتسعينات، وحتى اليوم طفرة إنتاجية في الصين والهند وغيرهما، واصبح التحكم بنفط العالم هو أداة ضبط إيقاع الإنتاج والسوق. وكيف يكون ذلك لبلد لم يعد هو المنتج الرئيسي منفردا في هذا العالم. فبعد تراجع حصة اميركا من الإنتاج المدني العالمي، كان لا بد أن تنافس مدنياً عبر الأسلحة، لا بد من احتلال العراق للسيطرة على النفط والتحكم بتدفقه، وعند الاضطرار ، خلق مستوطنات (عسكرية/مدنية) هناك، لتتحول القواعد إلى مدن عسكرية مدنية. وبهذا تحاول اميركا التحكم بنمو هذين البلدين، بل والعالم بأسره. هذا إضافة إلى تحويل أفغانستان إلى قاعدة لأميركا هناك اقرب إلى كل آسيا. وماذا يهم الطبقات الحاكمة في أميركا ونظيراتها في الغرب الراسمالي لو ماتت جنودهم هناك؟ لا شيىء، فهناك تخريجيتين:
العلنية: الدفاع عن مصلحة الأمة
والسرية: ليموت أبناء الطبقات الشعبية من أجل راس المال.
لذا، كان طبيعياً وضروريا تدمير العراق وافغانستان. كان لا بد من التدمير ليتبعه التعمير، هذا منطق راس المال. وهو منطق لا تظهر بشاعته للوهلة الأولى. فليس الأمر مجرد هدم أبنية وطرقات قديمة لإقامة بديلة جديدة، بل هي ذبح ملايين البشر من أجل تشغيل ماكينة راس المال. ماكينة تدور بالدم والنفط، بالأحمر والأسود. لذا، دُمر العراق بدءاً من حضارة سومر وأكد، وحتى الجيش وذبح مئات الألاف واغتيل العلماء، واغتصبت النساء ولا ندري ماذا بعد.
وكل هذا تم باسم دمقرطة العراق على يد بلد يفاخر ب "المجتمع المدني"، هذا الزعم الذي يصلي في محرابه كثير من المثقفين العرب، تجار استيراد الثقافة "كمبرادور الثقافة".
وهكذا، يبقى الإحتلال في العراق طالما المشروع مربحاً وإلى أن يصبح المشروع خاسراً و/أو يثور طالبو البطاقة الخضراء لفرط خوفهم وموتهم، أو خوفهم من حتفهم وإلى جانب هذا كله، إلى أن يكون في الكثير من محيط العراق من هم أفضل ممن هم اليوم. والى أن تمتد المقاومة إلى وطن المقاومة، وهي تمتد حقاً.

A Great Comment
By Khalid Amayreh

"The kissing, some say “exaggerated kissing” at Ehud Olmert’s official residence in Jerusalem on 23 December looked cordial and surrealistic. Cordial because Abbas and Olmert (and also the old-timer Ahmed Qrei) were smacking kisses on each other’s cheeks like gluttonous lovers.

Well, even the proverbial prodigal son wouldn’t have received this preponderance of warmth, which really surprised political observers and gave the impression that the “problem” between Israel and the Palestinian people was only psychological in nature.

And surrealistic because only a few months ago, Olmert was referring to Abbas as “irrelevant, weak, and expendable” until the Israeli premier was prodded by the Bush Administration to stop it.

This , of course, is added to the thousands of Palestinians, most of them innocent civilians, whom Olmert’s army murdered and maimed since he came to power more than six months ago as well as the concomitant wanton destruction wreaked on Palestinian towns and villages by the Nazi-like Israeli war machine.

So what happened behind the curtains of secrecy that we pen pushers and keyboard clickers have failed to notice? Well, in truth, nothing at all has really happened, apart from a request from Tony Blair that the two sides put up a “positive show” for the cameras to give the impression that “things are finally moving” between Israel and the Palestinians.

Otherwise, the basic realities involving God’s lying people and God’s tormented people remained unchanged. Indeed, no sooner had the kissing party in West Jerusalem been over than the Israeli government ordered the creation of a new Jewish-only colony in the West Bank.

The new colony, the construction of which is already underway, is Israel ’s and Olmert’s peculiar way of displaying good will toward the “moderate Palestinian leader.” And, Abbas, who has not uttered a word in protest against this humiliating affront continues to be almost euphoric about the outcome of his encounter with Olmert.

At the same time, Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who has been trying desperately to portray herself as “rational and moderate,” is reportedly working on a new ‘peace’ initiative whereby “the land of Israel” (notice how she doesn’t even recognize the very existence of Palestine and Palestinians) would be divided along the apartheid wall. This is the same wall which Israeli politicians, leaders and spokespersons have been telling the world ad nauseam that it is a security barrier not a political border.

Not only that. Livni, who had opposed Sharon ’s plan to remove Talmudic Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, wants Abbas and the Palestinian people to kiss good-by the right of five million Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and villages in what is now Israel and also forget about Jerusalem and al-Masjidul Aqsa (the Aqsa Mosque).

A smart lady, indeed!!

Interestingly, all this farce is taking place while Abbas and his cohorts are busy preparing for war against Hamas and other Palestinian factions in order to meet incessant demands to that effect by Condoleezza Rice and her ignorant master of the White House. This is evidenced from the reported “transfer” of thousands of rifles and millions of rounds by Egypt , in coordination with Israel , of course, to Abbas’s “presidential guard” and Fatah militiamen in Gaza .

Isn’t it disgraceful that the movement which for a long time stood at the forefront of Palestinian struggle for freedom and liberation has, willfully and happily, thrown itself into the laps our tormentors?

The Persian poet al-Saadi of Shiraz , who lived nearly 800 years ago, wrote that “when money appears, heads bow.” In the case of our hapless Palestinian leadership, it seems that not only their heads are bowing but also their principles, morals, and the proverbial constants of preserving national unity are collapsing like a house of cards.

Well, does Abbas think that placing his eggs, apparently all of them, in the American and Israeli baskets would enable him earn him respect in the eyes of his people, let alone extract Palestinian rights from Israel ’s hands? How many times did Israel and America promise the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, but to no avail? Shouldn’t Abbas learn from Arafat’s experience with the murderous liars in Tel Aviv and their guardians in Washington ?

The truth of the matter is that by “blending in” fast, deeply and cheaply with Olmert and the Americans, Chairman Abbas is actually committing a political suicide in the eyes of his people.

One disgruntled Fatah leader wrote this week that the widespread impression that Fatah was joining “the Sinioras and Karazais” (a reference to Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora and Afghan President Hamed Karazai) of Palestine was seriously undermining the movement’s image among ordinary Palestinians.

“The Israelis and Americans are actually killing our image. So far, we have succeeded in portraying ourselves as sincere fighters for our people’s freedom and independence. But, now with active American financial and military backing, we risk appearing to our people as quislings and agents working in collusion with Israel and its strategic ally, the United States . This is hurting us a lot.”

There is no doubt that Fatah will lose dearly as a result of this de facto collusion with Israel and the US against a segment of the Palestinian people.

But, when will the true patriots within Fatah rise up and say enough is enough. "

America's Puppet Of The Year

Snow covering the Dome of the Rock at the Al-Aqsa compound in the Old City of Jerusalem on Thursday. (Reuters)

A Good Piece
By Ramzy Baroud

"It's all too convenient for the BBC website to describe the ongoing bloodshed between Hamas and Fatah supporters in the Gaza Strip as “inter-factional rivalry,” and it’s equally fitting for the Washington Post to narrate the same unfortunate events — which have left many Palestinians dead and wounded — as if they are entirely detached from their adjoining regional and international milieus.

Also puzzling are calls made by “leading moderate Arab leaders” to fighting Palestinian factions to convene in this Arab capital or that to settle their differences and to achieve an increasingly elusive cease-fire, as if they, the Arabs — who cowed to US pressure to ensure the success of the debilitating sanctions imposed against the democratic Palestinian governments — haven’t contributed, actively and knowingly to the unfolding crisis in Palestine.

This is all but atypical, where Palestinians will be gently or harshly reprimanded for failing to sort out their differences in a more civilized manner, where they will be taught a lesson or two by some self-righteous American commentators about the true meaning of democracy, where they will be reminded that they are “their own worst enemies” and that they never “miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” Nonsense.

What is taking place in the Occupied Territories, particularly in the Gaza Strip has much less to do with inter-factional rivalries and a lot more with regional and international power plays, in which some foolhardy Palestinians decided to involve themselves for the sake of maintaining personal and factional gains.

To avoid delving into self-pity, I wish to emphasize a point that I have made repeatedly in the past: If it were not for the dysfunctional nature and lack of unity within the myriad of political and societal structures that claims to represent the Palestinian people, no political designs, be it American or Israeli or any other, would’ve succeeded in duping the Palestinians into such caustic behavior and self-defeatism. (The gunning down of three kids on Dec. 11 and the killing of other innocent people, including children, in addition to the attack on Prime Minister Ismail Haniya on Dec. 14, have indeed crossed all red lines.)

Self-admonishment aside, however, one must not be too hasty to conclude that the newest episode of violence witnessed in Gaza — following PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ suggestion of early polls on Dec. 9, and then his televised speech on Dec. 14 revealing his intention to hold early legislative and presidential elections— was a spur of the moment event, incited by lack of discipline on the part of a few rogue elements. Rather, it’s a facet of the thus-far unsuccessful, prolonged coup d’état to topple the Palestinian government, which was declared candidly by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, demanded by Israel, and entrusted to President Abbas and some factions within his Fatah party, following Hamas’ advent to power in the internationally monitored and transparent elections held January 2006.

Those who might find it justifiable to oust a “theocratic” regime by any means necessary, even by an assassin’s bullet, fail to realize that despite Hamas’ religious posture, it has done very little so far to divert from the dictates of democracy. To the contrary, they seem more keen on adhering to the secular Palestinian Constitution than Abbas himself.

Indeed, this is not a war between religious zealots and democratic secularists; far from it. However, it’s a battle of many meanings, each tailored and defined to suit the interests and manage the concerns of the many parties involved, and indeed, they are not all Palestinians.

Hamas did not come to power on the back of an American tank, like more or less the pro-Washington regime in Iraq, or via an Israeli sanctioned and armed political system of corruption and elitism, like the one concocted following the signing of Oslo in 1993. It neither imposed nor manipulated its way to power. It was the outcome of an overwhelming democratic process, ironically enough, a part of America’s democratic drive in the Middle East, itself a distraction from its horrendous failures in Iraq.

So what went wrong?

The election of Hamas sent shock waves across the Middle East, for it offered an Islamic alternative that didn’t defy the norms of democracy, but seemed capable of locating a method for a lasting union between the two, unlike the Algerian example, which inspired the most destructive civil war.

Second, it crippled the Bush administration’s vision of democracy in the Middle East, one that is cemented with the assumption that pro-American regional allies can possibly achieve a façade of democracy without any major overhauling of their political systems that might endanger US interests. The Iraqi and Egyptian presidential elections were hoped to be the models to follow, not that of Hamas.

Third, Hamas’ win, mostly based on its anti-corruption ticket, has threatened to destroy and filter out an utterly corrupt political system that the Palestinian Authority’s echelons have enjoyed, with full Israeli backing. The authority’s structure, as constructed by Oslo, has produced one of the most corrupt and corruptible political regimes, with full reliance on American and European aid, money that has barely tricked down on the oppressed multitudes.

Palestinians had no illusions that electing a government under occupation doesn’t change the status quo of their beleaguered lives, but it could, they hoped, bring an end to the nepotistic system espoused at home.

The Bush administration, which immediately toned down its democracy rhetoric following the Palestinian elections was hell-bent on toppling Hamas. Although for Israel no matter who is at the Palestinian helm, Israel can never admit to having a trustworthy peace partner (for Israel it has always been about winning time, rather than achieving peace). The Israelis seemed to be enjoying and had actively exploited Palestinian chaos for it represented a historical opportunity to consume Palestinians in endless internal strife, and even better, a civil war. And as the Arabs followed Washington’s orders and as the Europeans waited for further instructions (so much for the European alternative peace broker), Palestinians fell into the trap, turning one of the shiniest moments for democracy in the region, to one of extreme irony, agony and possible defeat.

It is decidedly clear that the policy planners in Washington and Tel Aviv have converged on the need for a prolonged era of Palestinian infighting and to eventually topple the government. It’s also clear that Abbas and his followers have agreed to play their entrusted roles, as have many Arab rulers.

I desperately want to conclude with the claim that Palestinians will once again withstand this harsh, cruel test, and win with their unity and democracy unscathed; but after what I have seen in the last few weeks, and being convinced of the extent of the American experiment that stretches far beyond the crowded streets of besieged, impoverished Gaza, I am no longer certain that they will.

But if they fail, so will true democracy and its advocates, for the word would then be devoid of any meaning, and would once again be demoted to resemble another usual US charade, as it always has."

Salim Lone
International Herald Tribune

"NAIROBI: Undeterred by the horrors and setbacks in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, the Bush administration has opened another battlefront in the Muslim world. With full U.S. backing and military training, at least 15,000 Ethiopian troops have entered Somalia in an illegal war of aggression against the Union of Islamic Courts, which controls almost the entire south of the country.

As with Iraq in 2003, the United States has cast this as a war to curtail terrorism, but its real goal is to obtain a direct foothold in a highly strategic region by establishing a client regime there. The Horn of Africa is newly oil-rich, and lies just miles from Saudi Arabia, overlooking the daily passage of large numbers of oil tankers and warships through the Red Sea. General John Abizaid, the current U.S. military chief of the Iraq war, was in Ethiopia this month, and President Hu Jintao of China visited Kenya, Sudan and Ethiopia earlier this year to pursue oil and trade agreements.

The U.S. instigation of war between Ethiopia and Somalia, two of world's poorest countries already struggling with massive humanitarian disasters, is reckless in the extreme. Unlike in the run-up to Iraq, independent experts, including from the European Union, were united in warning that this war could destabilize the whole region even if America succeeds in its goal of toppling the Islamic Courts.

An insurgency by Somalis, millions of whom live in Kenya and Ethiopia, will surely ensue, and attract thousands of new anti-U.S. militants and terrorists.

With so much of the world convulsed by crisis, little attention has been paid to this unfolding disaster in the Horn. The UN Security Council, however, did take up the issue, and in another craven act which will further cement its reputation as an anti-Muslim body, bowed to American and British pressure to authorize a regional peacekeeping force to enter Somalia to protect the transitional government, which is fighting the Islamic Courts.

The new UN resolution states that the world body acted to "restore peace and stability." But as all major international news organizations have reported, this year Somalia finally experienced its first respite from 16 years of utter lawlessness and terror at the hands of the marauding warlords who drove out UN peacekeepers in 1993, when 18 American soldiers were killed.

Since 1993, there had been no Security Council interest in sending peacekeepers to Somalia, but as peace and order took hold, a multilateral force was suddenly deemed necessary — because it was the Islamic Courts Union that had brought about this stability. Astonishingly, the Islamists had succeeded in defeating the warlords primarily through rallying people to their side by creating law and order through the application of Shariah law, which Somalis universally practice.

The transitional government, on the other hand, is dominated by the warlords and terrorists who drove out American forces in 1993. Organized in Kenya by U.S. regional allies, it is so completely devoid of internal support that it has turned to Somalia's arch- enemy, Ethiopia, for assistance.

If this war continues, it will affect the whole region, do serious harm to U.S. interests and threaten Kenya, the only island of stability in this corner of Africa.

Ethiopia is at even greater risk, as a dictatorship with little popular support and beset also by two large internal revolts, by the Ogadenis and Oromos. It is also mired in a conflict with Eritrea, which has denied it secure access to seaports.

The best antidote to terrorism in Somalia is stability, which the Islamic Courts have provided. The Islamists have strong public support, which has grown in the face of U.S. and Ethiopian interventions. As in other Muslim-Western conflicts, the world needs to engage with the Islamists to secure peace."

Man Of The Year

"Nazareth - Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni has met with two PLO and Fatah officials three days ago in line with ongoing "backdoor" negotiations between the two parties on major issues, according to Ma'ariv daily on Thursday.

The paper said that the meeting was held on Monday 25/12, noting that it came only few days after PA chief Mahmoud Abbas proposed holding such secret channels during his meeting with Israeli premier Ehud Olmert.

It said that Livini has been preparing an initiative to resume negotiations with the Palestinians over final status of major questions according to the Geneva document that gives up the Palestinian refugees' right of return and included Israeli readiness to evacuate a number of West Bank settlements.

The report named the PLO executive committee member Yasser Abed Rabbo and Fatah leader and former PA finance minister Salam Fayyadh as the officials that met Livni."

"Occupied Jerusalem - Israeli first vice premier Shimon Peres held a series of in-camera meetings with Jibril Al-Rejoub, advisor to PA chief Mahmoud Abbas, and Sirri Nusseiba, rector of Al-Quds Open University, Hebrew media reported.

The reports said that Rejoub, who is the former head of the PA preventive security apparatus in the West Bank, and Nusseiba, who previously was in charge of the Jerusalem file and who proposed an initiative that annulled the Palestinian refugees' right of return, traveled to Spain a couple of days ago for the meetings.

They said that the meetings would end on Thursday but could not pinpoint the exact issues discussed in view of secrecy of the meetings, which might end in a joint declaration on Thursday evening.

The secret meetings coincide with Abbas' declaration in Cairo on Wednesday that he proposed "backdoor" talks between the PA and Israel over major issues in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Abbas told a press conference at conclusion of his Cairo visit that he offered the idea during talks with Israeli premier Ehud Olmert, who promised to study it, and added that the USA did not reject the idea. "

Egypt transfers arms, ammunition to Fatah


"Egypt transfered a large quantity of arms and ammunition to Palestinian Authority security organizations in the Gaza Strip Wednesday. The move was carried out with Israel's approval and was made in an effort to bolster Fatah affiliated groups, following clashes with Hamas paramilitary organizations.

The shipment included 2,000 AK-47 rifles, 20,000 magazines and two million rounds of ammunition. The arms and ammunition were transfered from Egypt to Israel through the Kerem Shalom crossing, in coordination with the Israel Defense Force and with the government's authorization.

The four trucks carrying the weapons were accompanied by Military Police, and crossed into the Gaza Strip through the Karni crossing, where PA security personnel received the shipment......

The issue of reinforcing the Fatah forces was the subject of discussions among Israeli, Egyptian and American officials. A decision was made during the meeting between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Saturday.

During the meeting, Abbas also promised to deploy men from his Presidential Guard along the Philadelphi Route to prevent smuggling, and also in the northern Gaza Strip, to prevent the targetting of Israeli towns with Qassam rockets."

***

The Slow Motion Coup Is Right On Schedule; Are You Paying Attention, Hamas? Or Are You Still Waiting For "Brother Abu Mazen" To Restart "Unity Talks?" I Am Afraid You Are Giving Him All The Time He Needs To Set Up The Gallows For You!

Egypt: Captured Israeli soldier is alive

"JERUSALEM - The Israeli soldier captured by Palestinian militants last June is still alive, Egypt's foreign minister said Wednesday during a visit to Jerusalem.

Ahmed Aboul Gheit said Egypt is mediating between Israel and Hamas to win the release of Cpl. Gilad Shalit, who was captured last June by militants linked to the ruling Hamas faction who tunneled into Israel and then fled back to Gaza. Shalit has not been seen or heard from since then, though Israeli officials have said they believe he is alive.

"This is a very sensitive issue," Aboul Gheit told a news conference in Jerusalem. "I hope and believe that he will be released ... but I emphasize that we are working hard for his release and we are sure that he is still alive."

However, he said he could not guarantee Shalit's release.

Aboul Gheit spoke in Arabic and his comments were translated into Hebrew. The news conference was held after a meeting with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni.

The militants holding Shalit have demanded a large-scale prisoner release by Israel."

***

Bastard, Boot Licker!

Associated Press
26 December 2006

A top military judge disclosed that 2,700 Palestinians have been detained without trial this year, criticizing the military prosecution for not filing charges against
some of them.

Colonel Shaul Gordon, chief justice of the army's West Bank appeals court, told the soldiers' weekly "Bamahane" that 2,000 of the detainees filed appeals, and their
detention was shortened in many cases. He said even the ones who do not file appeals are reviewed.

The practice of administrative detention has been harshly criticized by Palestinians and human rights groups, who say that if the military has evidence against suspects, it should put them on trial. The military has responded that sometimes evidence is too sensitive to submit to a trial.

Gordon, who is leaving his post after six years, backed the critics in some cases. "Sometimes we get the impression that with a bit more effort in the investigation, an indictment could have been brought, because that is the best way," he told the weekly.

The publication reported that Gordon instituted basic reforms in the military court system during his term.

Until 2002, the military courts were part of the army prosecution system, but Gordon forced a separation, making the courts independent. "Today every defense lawyer knows
the prosecution is a separate entity" from the courts, he said.

Also, until two years ago, the military used army officers with no legal training as judges. The weekly said standard procedure was to run defendants through the judicial
process at top speed, with officers pulling duty as judges regardless of their qualifications.

Gordon scrapped the system. "It appeared absurd and unacceptable to me," he said. Instead, he persuaded civilian judges to serve their reserve army duty as
military judges.

The soldiers' publication said that about 10,000 indictments are brought against Palestinians each year, including 3,600 for security offenses and 1,500 for public
disturbance. Others are criminal and traffic offenses.

Gordon said the most difficult period was during Israel's 2001 sweep through the West Bank that followed a wave of Palestinian suicide bombings. The judicial system was
flooded with thousands of detainees. In one case, he said, a Palestinian was brought before him on charges that he helped plan a terror attack.

Gordon asked for the documentation and was shocked to read that the man was innocent - another person had confessed to the crimes of which he was accused. "That's a story
that shows how we can go wrong," he told the weekly.

Iraqis By the Numbers

By FARUQ ZIADA
CounterPunch

"The United States based its policy on Iraq on two primary so-called facts:

1. The Sunnis are a 20 % minority.

2. The Sunni minority and Saddam Hussein ruled the Shiite majority in Iraq.

Thus, the U.S. Iraq policy -- as set by the Bush Administration, and the Neoconservatives--both before and after the 2003 war and occupation, was based on this false premise. Because of this, the Sunnis were marginalized and power was handed over to the Shiite religious parties and Kurdish parties by the occupation force CPA, Ambassador Bremer, and later Ambassador Negroponte.

Based on this false premise, the U.S. policy failed miserably. Still, the Bush Administration continued and still is continuing this policy. Bush called it "Stay the course"

For this reason, and to bring to light information that should help inform a new policy, it is of the utmost importance to correct this fallacy. We need to put the facts in front of all who will try to correct the course, find the correct necessary policies to end the bloodshed, and end the catastrophe that has befallen Iraq.

The Correct Percentages of Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs, and Kurds

The actual, real percentages of various groups in Iraq is outlined below. Statistics come from the Al- Quds Press Research Center, London Study (www.qudspress.c om) and, with reference to the map on the distribution of religious groups, from the Baker--Hamilton Committee report page, 102).

As Nationalities
Arabs 82 - 84%
Kurds, Turks, etc. 16 - 18%

Religions
Moslems 95 - 98%
Christians and others 2 - 5%

Moslem Sects
Sunnis 60 - 62%
Sunni Arabs 42 - 44%
Sunni Kurds and Turks 16 - 18%
Shiites 38 - 40%
Shiite Kurds and Turks 2 - 4%
Percentage of Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs, and Kurds
............

Conclusion

With the full backing of Shiite religious leaders and all efforts by the Shiite political parties, groups and factions, regardless of whether they were religious or liberal (Ahmed Al-Chalabi), and uniting under one banner (Shiite), the numbers that the Shiites could muster were meager. It can be clearly seen that they are a minority in Iraq, and not a majority:

They received 26.3 % of the votes of eligible voters in the January 31 2005 elections.

They received 32.2% of the votes of eligible voters (regardless of all election violations, forgeries and filled ballots boxes) in the December 15, 2005 elections

Therefore, one of the main reasons for the drastic failure of U.S. policy in Iraq must be attributed to the reliance on the false premise that the Sunnis are a minority and the Shiites are a majority in Iraq. It is very clear from the official numbers taken from the results of the elections of January 31, 2005, and December 15, 2005, that: the Sunnis are 60--62 % of the population of Iraq (42-44% Arab, and 16-18% Kurd and Turk Iraqis), and only 38--40 % are Shiites. "

Abbas to Mubarak: PA ready for 'backdoor' talks with Israel

"Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas proposed Wednesday the start of "backdoor" negotiations with Israel on the most difficult problems of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

"It is the right time to talk about this issue seriously," Abbas told
reporters after he met Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak onTuesday."

ليس عيباً بل جريمة!

بقلم :سوسن البرغوثي

بعد اقتراب عام كامل تذّوق فيه الشعب الفلسطيني وحكومته شتى أنواع القسوة والعنف الممنهج من السلطة والاحتلال، والإنكار العالمي لخيار الشعب، وحصار خانق على مدى شهور للإطباق والإجهاز على ما تبقى للشعب الفلسطيني من مطالبة بحقه العام والخاص.

سنة ونحن نشهد تجنيداً منقطع النظير لقوى أسست لتيارٍ منشقٍ عن ثوابت النضال الفلسطيني، ومن العمل الدؤوب للاستئثار بالسلطة دون تقديم أي منجز على أرض الواقع.

سنوات مضت والفلسطينيون ينتظرون بوادر نتائج الاتفاقيات الكثيرة التي أبرمت على أنها في صالح الفلسطينيين، ولا شيء من ذلك غير مزيد من البؤر الاستيطانية ومواصلة بناء جدار يعزل الفلسطينيين عن أبسط متطلبات حياتهم الطبيعية، وانتهاكات مستمرة للمقدسات، وما زلنا نسمع وجوب العودة إلى طاولة المفاوضات، كتخدير موضعي والشعب بين فكي كماشة يعاني من الضغط المستمر.

في محاولة عملية رصد شامل لما وصل إليه الشعب الفلسطيني وقضيته، يقود إلى ضرورة التحرك كي لا ينحدر الوضع من سيء إلى أسوأ، وكي لا يبقى رهن فئة عبثية لا تملك المصداقية ولا الجدية في البحث عن حل مشرّف وعادل لنكبة حلت بتشريد شعب وتدمير الشجر والحجر والبشر.

فالأرض محتلة والشعب منقسم على نفسه بين حاشية تُرضي أسياداً فُرضوا عليه، ليقبل بأي حل ومهما كان أو يكون، وبين محتل لا يرحم صغيرهم ولا كبيرهم، فإلى متى، وماذا تعني الثورة إذن؟..

عندما يتعرض الشعب لضغط لا يُحتمل، لا بد من البدء بتوجيه رسائل الرفض بأي شكل وأي وسيلة تعبر عن خيار الشعب، فالتحايل الفلسطيني الرسمي على الشعب والقبول بـ "إسرائيل" كدولة تحل مكان فلسطين، والمناورة على تأسيس لبنة دويلة مهمشة ومهشمة فلسطينية في إطار الكيان الاستعماري، حاملين شعارات متناقضة تماماً كالممارسات والتصريحات، إضافة إلى استمرار السلطة بالمبايعة العلنية وهدر المال الفلسطيني، دون الالتفات لبناء بنية تحتية للمجتمع من مؤسسات ومصانع ومعاهد تقنية، مما جعل حماس كحركة مقاومة تصر على ضرورة إيقاف هذا التيار الضارب بعرض الحائط المصلحة العليا للشعب، والقبول بالدخول بالسلطة من منطلق المشاركة بالقرار السياسي وليس الشراكة لسلطة مترهلة مترنحة، المنزلقة بانحطاط نحو الهاوية مورطة الشعب الفلسطيني بالداخل والخارج من تداعيات سابقة وحالية، لتعرية النضال من ماهيته وابتداع شكل هلامي لسلطة منقسمة داخل أروقتها الحزبية.

يدرك الجميع أن الانتخابات والسلطة قائمتان تحت احتلال وهو شأن تنقصه السيادة، ولكن كيف يمكن أن تستمر المقاومة في ظل من يحتضن القضاء عليها، ليصبح العدو أمامها والعابثون بمصيرها بالخلف يكيلون كيداً ويحيكون مؤمرات لتصفيتها وإنهائها باسم التأكيد على المشروعية الدولية؟.

إن من يدقق بتصريحات بطانة الرئاسة، يدرك أن قياداتها أصيبت بخلل نفسي بعد خسارتهم بالانتخابات، فلم يحتملوا فكرة التغيير للمصلحة الوطنية، بوجود تيار يقف حجر عثرة أمام مشروع مقدم لهم لتنفيذه، وبعد ذلك العوض بسلامة الشعب، هذا إن بقي هناك بشر في فلسطين بعد التناوب على تصفيته.

فهذا الخلل يتضح ليس بإطلاق كلمات العيب على تيار وطني آخر، إنما موظفاً لتأكيد الحصار وليس لفكه، بتصعيد مشروع الانفصال عن خيار الشعب، ومحاولات مستمرة لإفشال المشاركة والتوافق الوطني، وكل ما تقدم يدحض زعمهم بأنهم قبلوا بنتائج الانتخابات.

منذ لحظة الإعلان عن تشكيل الحكومة بدأت العصي تعرقل المسيرة من أجل التغيير والإصلاح، ولهذا لنا أن نتساءل لماذا؟.

الحقيقة المجردة أن الحكومة المنتخبة ستفتح أبواب الفساد على مصاريعها، وسيُعرف وينفضح كل من قدمت يداه السوداء من جرائم بحق الشعب الفلسطيني بأكمله، لكن الحكاية لم تنتهِ عند هذا الحد من التهاون، إنما منح كيان الاحتلال شرعية وموافقة علنية لبيع فلسطين، مقابل السلطة والنفوذ على الشعب وليس الأرض، وابتزازه بالتجويع لتجيشه لحساب السلطة الرئاسية وملحقاتها، والمفسدة لشعب لم يطأطئ رأسه للاحتلال، ولم تهن كرامته وكبرياؤه أمام فتات موائدهم، ليصبح مطية تُنفذ باسمه أحكام إعدام محتم لفلسطين.

هذا الابتزاز لم يتوقف عند حد العراقيل والتجويع، بل تطاول لاستغباء متعمد للشعب على أنه مصدر السلطات!، فهل استفتي الشعب بقبول المفاوضات، وهل أقر الشعب بالحرامي "الإسرائيلي" حامي الأراضي الفلسطينية من شعبها، أم أن القبول بحكومة الوحدة الوطنية على مقاس العالم العربي المعتدل والغربي المنحاز، هو إثبات بأن الشعب هو آخر من يفكر به عباس ومن حوله؟. وماذا لو أجريت انتخابات رئاسية وتشريعية مبكرة، ولم ترضِ المحتل وأصحاب النخوة العربية المعتدلة، والنشامى الفلسطينيون المتصهينون بتجديد الرفض الشعبي للخنوع لسلطة وإملاءات القرارات الدولية، فهل سنشهد فصلاً جديداً من وقوف الجوقة ذاتها ضد مصدر السلطات، ونعود إلى الموقف نفسه من الانقسام وشراء الذمم من أجل تعبيد الطريق العربية أمام آل صهيون؟.

ليس عيباً يا سيادة الرئيس، بل جريمة يقترفها رأس السلطة بالاجتماع مع من تلطخت يداه بدماء من هو مسؤول عن حماية حياتهم وأمنهم، والتوسل للرجوع إلى طاولة خارطة الطريق، وتبادل القبلات مع مجرم حرب بجدارة، وهو من قتل أبرياء في القطاع والضفة الغربية، وهو من يحاصر ويحتجز الأموال وبدعم السلطة، فالعيب كلمة تافهة أمام ما حدث، ولا ينطبق على ما اقترفته أياديكم سوى الجرم والقفز على المحرمات الوطنية، وهذا ما لا يقره منطق ولا دين.

كفاكم ضحكاً وتسخيفاً للشعب، وعباس وتوابعه يراهن على أولمرت ووعوده الكاذبة، والشعب يفتقر للأمن الداخلي والقوت اليومي، وكفاكم متاجرة بدمائه وصوته، والشروط معدة مسبقاً لإنجاح والقبول بأي حكومة تُبقي تلك الفئة في مكان صدارة اقتسام الكعكة النتنة، والتي لا تصلح لموافقة أي عاقل يعي ما حدث ابتداءً من أوسلو حتى يومنا هذا.

هذا التيار الحاكم بأمر "إسرائيل" هو مستنسخ استنساخاً رديئاً من حركة فتح، وبت على قناعة أنه لم يكن منتمياً لحركته الأم في يوم من الأيام، ولا داعياً للوحدة الوطنية، بقدر ما هو فاقد لتوازن واتزان وطني وأخلاقي، بعد إسقاطه رسمياً من الشعب، وإلا ما هي تلك فرق الموت والأجهزة الأمنية وقوات بدر المستوردة من الخارج، وإلى من موجهة، هل إلى مصدر السلطات؟، أم لصالح بائع متجول يجوب الجنوب والشمال المحتل، دون أن يتعرض لأي مضايقة من الاحتلال، يشحن ويوظف أنصاف العقول والأنذال لفتنة وطنية. فبالأمس كانت دعوة للحوار المبطن بالفشل مقدماً وانسداد أفقه في المستقبل العاجل، واليوم أمر آخر وقناع آخر يلتمس ويتوسل رأس حكومة العدو بالإفراج عن المال الفلسطيني، والهدف بالمماطلة وتضييع الوقت هو كسر إرادة الشعب في مواصلة مسيرة التحرر، واستغلاله في أبشع جريمة بحق نضاله، ليصبح قرباناً من أجل كرسي ومنصب تتهافت عليه قوى مختلة في قراراتها، ومنفلتة من أي احتكام للعقل وشرعية السلطة وأركانها.

Intelligence sources say President Bush -- along with Israel's Ehud Olmert and the UK's Tony Blair -- are weighing the possibility of Israeli-led attacks on Syria and Iran in early 2007, with the United States providing logistical back-up.

By Robert Parry

"The first two or three months of 2007 represent a dangerous opening for an escalation of war in the Middle East, as George W. Bush will be tempted to "double-down" his gamble in Iraq by joining with Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and outgoing British Prime Minister Tony Blair to strike at Syria and Iran, intelligence sources say.

President Bush's goal would be to transcend the bloody quagmire bogging down U.S. forces in Iraq by achieving "regime change" in Syria and by destroying nuclear facilities in Iran, two blows intended to weaken Islamic militants in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

The Israeli army and air force would carry the brunt of any new fighting albeit with the support of beefed-up U.S. ground and naval forces in the Middle East, the sources said. Bush is now considering a "surge" in U.S. troop levels in Iraq from about 140,000 to as many as 170,000. He also has dispatched a second aircraft carrier group to the coast of Iran.

So far, however, Bush has confronted stiff opposition from the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff to the plan for raising troop levels in Iraq, partly because the generals don't think it makes sense to commit more troops without a specific military mission.

But it's unclear how much the generals know about the expanded-war option which has been discussed sometimes in one-on-one meetings among the principals -- Bush, Olmert and Blair -- according to intelligence sources.

Since the Nov. 7 congressional elections, the three leaders have conducted a round-robin of meetings that on the surface seem to have little purpose. Olmert met privately with Bush on Nov. 13; Blair visited the White House on Dec. 7; and Blair conferred with Olmert in Israel on Dec. 18.

All three leaders could salvage their reputations if a wider war broke out in the Middle East and then broke in their favor.

.....Continue"

Latuff: I created this cartoon with the assistance of a kind Palestinian girl called Yasmine. Take a look at her blog: http://sileas.wordpress.com

Thank you, Yasmine. I love you and your people.

Framing Iran and Hamas:

DEBKAfile Exclusive: Iranian officers take command of Palestinian Gaza missile front. But Olmert ties IDF to pinpoint fire on missile crews after two Sderot schoolboys seriously hurt

".......Our military sources report that the IDF does not accept the Iran-sponsored Jihad Islami’s claim to have shot the missile which wounded the schoolboys because since Monday, Dec. 25, two changes were detected in the Palestinian offensive: A new type of homemade missile called Al Buraq 2 (after the Western Wall Jewish shrine in Jerusalem), and a new unit, calling itself the Mujahiddin Brigades, identified by military experts as the first Palestinian terrorist unit set up by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ al Quds Brigades.

This group’s first action was to fire the new missiles at Kibbutz Nahal Oz Monday. They were diagnosed at first as mortars, but the fragments did not match any ordnance seen before. It was then discovered that the Mujahiddin Brigades units - consisting of Hamas, Jihad Islami, Fatah-al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Popular Resistance Committees operatives - are commanded by an Iranian Revolutionary Guards officer.

Such direct Iranian command of front-line Palestinian missile units is another innovation; it did not occur even on the Hizballah side of the of July-August Lebanon war.

Monday, too, the Americans disclosed the capture in Baghdad of Iranian officers, members of the same RG al Quds Brigades, on another front line: against Iraqi and coalition forces. It looks as though the Islamic Republic has gone into action in Iraq and Gaza in reprisal for the tepid sanctions the UN Security Council imposed Saturday, Dec. 23, for its continuing pursuit of uranium enrichment. "

Samah Idriss, Al-Adab Magazine. Translation by Tadmaon!, 27 December 2006
Electronic Lebanon

"........"We want to live!" This is what president Siniora says, repeating the slogans posted on bulletin boards across the capital these days. Those promoting the new slogan may be no different from those who, after the end of the Syrian tutelage, promoted the slogan "Independence 05" followed, a few months later, by the slogan "Dependence 06", mocking and ridiculing the first! We, of course, want to live like Siniora wants. But, "free and dignified" living has to include everyone: our captives in the jails of occupation that have sacrificed for us, our people in the South dwelling amid daily Israeli violations and in the danger that one of the one million two hundred thousand cluster bomblets dropped by Israel during the last hours before the cease-fire could explode in the face of their sons and daughters. Free and dignified living should include the poor and dispossessed, low-income employees and the victims of Hariri’s "reconstruction"— most people neither benefited from his upscale Solidère or from his luxurious airport. "We want to live" should include, as well, the more than three hundred thousand Palestinians who, in the camps of misery, are simply not "living". And, by the way, only one thing "lives" better now than at anytime in the past: the banks!"

Arab Puppets Lining Up To Kiss Olmert's Ass

PM's office says Aboul Gheit welcomes Israeli efforts to strengthen PA moderates. Olmert to meet Mubarak next week in Egypt

"Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit expressed his country's appreciation of Israel's policy of restraint and efforts to empower moderates in the Palestinian Authority, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said in a statement issued following the meeting held between the two leaders earlier Wednesday in Jerusalem.

According to the statement Olmert and Aboul Gheit spoke of the continuous ceasefire breaches and their implications. The PM explained the complexity of the situation due to incessant rocket attacks against Israel throughout the ceasefire and Israel's need to preserve the lives of its citizens.

The two also spoke of Olmert's upcoming meeting with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and general Mideast developments. Olmert also stressed the importance of preventing arms smuggling across the Egypt-Gaza border."

By Amira Hass

"Until Enaya Samara, who has been living in forced exile for the past eight months returns to her village near Ramallah, and until Someida Abbas, who was banished from his home 10 months ago accompanies his children to kindergarten again, it will not be possible to believe the defense establishment's promise to change its policy. So long as American, Brazilian and German citizens whose name is not Cohen but Abdullah, are refused entry at the borders, we will know that the policy is still in effect - the policy of causing tens of thousands of Palestinian families to break up, or to leave their homes and emigrate. This is not a new policy in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Since 1967, Israel has been carrying out demographic manipulations which should actually be called expulsion. Military edicts have caused some 100,000 people to lose their status as permanent residents in the occupied territories and to remain exiles in the countries to which they went to study or work. These manipulations have turned 240,000 people who were born in the West bank and Gaza and left the territories because of the 1967 war, and another 60,000 who were abroad when it broke out, to become new refugees......

......More than ever before, the Israeli system today denies the fact that it is repression and discrimination, an integral part of every occupation, that create the security threat. The most it is prepared to do is make "improvements" and mete out "favors," but it will not recognize rights. "

Israel breaks promise to U.S. with settlement
West Bank housing for settlers ousted from Gaza approved despite pledge

"JERUSALEM - Israel has approved a new settlement in the West Bank to house former Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, officials said Tuesday, breaking a promise to the U.S. to halt home construction in the Palestinian territories.

Construction in the northern West Bank town of Maskiot began months ago, but the project only received final approval from the Defense Ministry last week, said Dubi Tal, head of the Jordan Valley regional council.

Saeb Erekat, an aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, condemned the construction and urged the government to revoke its authorization, saying it violated the spirit of cooperation inaugurated by a meeting Saturday between Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert."

By Imad Khadduri

"I wrote the following before the occupation of Iraq, i.e. nearly four years ago, in my book "Iraq's Nuclear Mirage: Memoirs and Delusions, page 223:
.
"An unfair reaction developed to the above articles by close Iraqi and Canadian friends. Their attitude prompted me to write the following “Postscript” to the published articles. It was sent only to selected Iraqi and Canadian friends on March 13, 2003, one week before the invasion of Iraq:

“There is the assumption that if one decries the coming slaughter of Iraqis by Americans, that one must also curse Saddam at the same time; otherwise, so the accusations go, you are defending Saddam. This self-imposed condition may be summarized in the following anguished retort of an Iraqi friend: "I watched the video of the whole interview. Very interesting, but what I also find interesting is the fact that you never said a word about Saddam and the horrors he caused the Iraqi people!! Not a single word!!. . I think any Iraqi should never miss an opportunity to tell the world what Saddam has done to Iraq and the Iraqi people."

Both my Iraqi, and non-Iraqi, friends have made similar comments as above, and have attempted to coax me into denouncing Saddam each time I discussed Iraq's nuclear non-capability. However, this suggestion by my friends merely reflects the dead end of their own logic, as will become evident in the following exchange.

I personally can touch and feel the pain of my Iraqi friends. They have suffered much more than my family and I at the hands of Saddam's Intelligence and Security apparatuses. We had left Iraq without their knowledge or their approval and at the risk of our death. Many others have lost their relatives or families. I accept their narrow vision of the need to curse that reign of terror daily, to spend nearly every breath venting their deep anguish and anger; however, if they could cast their justified emotions aside for just one moment, I ask for them to realize that the Americans are utterly lacking a viable plan for Iraq and the Iraqi people after they drop their hundreds of bombs and fire their destructive missiles at Iraq. This will lead to at least tens of thousands of dead Iraqis and the easy defeat of the tattered remains of the Iraqi army. Iraq and the Iraqi people will be in a state of free fall, dropping into a deeper abyss, with Turkey, Iran and Israel (with its own agenda against the Palestinians) all eyeing pieces of Iraqi flesh to bite off. The oil has already been marked.

I do not want to counter right now this same stance held by the non-Iraqis, whose selfish shortsightedness reveals deeper antagonisms.

In both cases, I reject their bankrupt final solution to their one-dimensional way of thinking, that "if you do not agree with us, why did you leave Iraq and why not return to Iraq”.

The coming war was not launched in the spur of the moment. It is an opportunity seized upon after September of 1991. Its seeds have been planted since the early nineties by a clique of American neoconservative right wing thinkers, with strong sympathies (and some, even ties) to Israeli interests. These thinkers engineered their plans for reshaping the Middle East through their work with the American Enterprise Institute, the Project for the New American Century, and other like-minded organizations.

They have managed to ascend to high ranks in the American State Department, the White House and especially the Pentagon. Among these neoconservative thinkers are Richard Perle (Chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board), Paul Wolfowitz (Deputy Defense Secretary), William Kristol (Chairman of the Project for the New American Century), Douglas Feith (Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon), Lewis Libby (Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff), and others.

A search on the Internet will reveal much more of their thinking, agenda and reports. Visit some of these organizations' websites. Despite fierce American media support, their arguments are being riddled with holes, yet the war crimes they plan on committing in Iraq will still take place.

My five articles, and the numerous TV and radio interviews, are solely intended to shred even further their flimsy arguments and expose the extent of the misinformation that is beamed to the American people and others to blind their vision of what is actually being enacted.

These neoconservatives will, sooner or later, be fully exposed and cast aside; hopefully they will appear in front of an international war tribunal along with Saddam.
The Iraqi people will resurrect”.
.
I erred in only fact above, and with great sorrow and pain, that the number of Iraqis killed as a result of the American occupation is in the hundreds of thousands of people, and not in the tens of thousands.
.
My above mentioned book ended with the following:
.
"The neoconservatives have indeed succeeded in manipulating the “American Way of Life” to devour my beloved Iraq.

We shall, however, resurrect, to their detriment.""

Just don’t talk about the war… Menachem Begin, Moshe Dayan and Yitzhak Rabin feting South Africa’s unrepentant Nazi Prime Minister B.J. Vorster at the Knesset in 1976










A Great Piece
By Tony Karon

"Nothing makes liberal American supporters of Israel more uncomfortable than the comparison between the circumstances it has imposed on the Palestinians and those that the apartheid regime imposed on black South Africans. That’s precisely why it is so important and commendable that Jimmy Carter has tempted the wrath of the Israel lobby and many Jewish-American liberals-in-denial by making that comparison — as he says, it’s time Americans took a look at Palestinian life and history, and as any good person of faith or basic humanity would, treat it as of equal value. The point being that Jimmy Carter had to write this book precisely because Palestinian life and history is not accorded equal value in American discourse, far from it. And his use of the word apartheid is not only morally valid; it is essential, because it shakes the moral stupor that allows many liberals to rationalize away the daily, grinding horror being inflicted Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.......

....Jimmy Carter wants American liberals, who’re passionate about Kosovo or Darfur, to consider the plight of the colonized Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza, and discuss their own and America’s moral responsibility to those people. Kinsley and countless other commentators want to avoid doing that, which is why they need to convince themselves that the reason the Palestinians don’t have a state is that they don’t have a Mandela; that instead they had an Arafat — in short, that the Palestinians are to blame for their plight.

I’ve written at length elsewhere about the bizarre habit of Americans of inventing their own Mandelas that have no relationship to the real one — suffice to point out for our purposes here that Mandela was a guerrilla commander who continued the armed struggle until the apartheid regime was ready to concede peacefully to the principle of black majority rule, so one wonders what, in fact, Michael Kinsley imagines a Palestinian Mandela would do. Parsing this question a few years ago in a TIME.com column, I concluded thus: “Of course, the Israelis would be wrong to think a Palestinian leader who was more like Mandela would be more pliant. Quite the contrary. They’d find it a lot harder to conclude a deal with a Mandela, or any leader of more democratic bent than Arafat. But in the end, they’d be able to rest a lot more assured that such a deal would hold.”

Curiously enough, when Nelson Mandela visited Gaza in 1999, he warned that in order for Israel to achieve peace and security, it would have to withdraw from all occupied territories, including the Golan Heights. “It is a realization of a dream for me to be here to come and pledge my solidarity with my friend Yasser Arafat,” Mandela said, and told the Palestinian legislature that “the histories of our two peoples correspond in such painful and poignant ways that I intensely feel myself at home amongst my compatriots.”

And you’d think that more than two years after Arafat’s death, people would start to feel a little silly blaming him for the fact that there’s no peace — especially at a moment when the Bush Administration is doing its best to get Mahmoud Abbas to govern in exactly the ways it denounced Arafat for doing, taking personal control of finances and security forces, ignoring elected institutions etc........

A digression: I’ll admit that growing up as a Jewish liberal in South Africa, I somehow managed to convince myself that apartheid had nothing to do with us, that Jews were somehow automatically in the anti-apartheid column — it was a lot easier to do this in light of the rabid anti-Semitism of the ruling National Party, whose leaders had actively sympathized with the Nazis. Even then, it wasn’t true; evidence to the contrary was everywhere: Israel was, together with Pinochet’s Chile, the closest foreign ally of the regime, and in 1976, it welcomed the unrepentant Nazi, Prime Minister John Vorster (who had spent time in an internment camp during the war after being captured running sabotage operations under the direction of the Nazi intelligence service) on a state visit, and even took him to Yad Vashem! Activists of my wing of the Zionist youth movement, the socialist-inclined Habonim, protested, and were told to shut up by the senior leadership of the SA Zionist Federation. The following year, one of the leading lights of the Likud-aligned Revisionist bloc that dominated the SAZF, Abe Hoppenstein, stood for parliament on the National Party ticket.......

Indeed, Jimmy Carter wasn’t the first person to raise the idea in my head that what Israel had created in the West Bank and Gaza is an apartheid situation. Back in January of 1979, when he was still in the White House, I was in Israel, living and working on Kibbutz Yizreel for about six weeks, fervently committed to making aliyah myself. Yizreel, in the Jezreel Valley, was home to a number of graduates of South African Habonim. And I vividly remember a discussion they started with us one afternoon, about the policy of building Israeli settlements in the West Bank that the new Likud government was encouraging. The South African-Israelis saw the continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as a disaster for Israel and for their own progressive version of Zionism. And they recognized that the settlements were a calculated strategy by Begin and Sharon to create “facts on the ground” that would make handing it back impossible. “And so,” one summarized, “you have a situation where Israel now has control over more than 3 million Palestinians. If it annexes the West Bank, they become citizens of Israel, and Israel quickly loses its Jewish majority. So that’s not an option. But the settlement policy makes it more and more difficult for Israel to envisage letting go of the territories. So what are you left with? An apartheid situation.” Of course. To anyone who had lived in South Africa, it was blindingly obvious. "

Sayyed Nasrallah says this pilgrimage season is occasion to block sedition among Muslims

"Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah issued a statement for the occasion of the Muslim Hajj Pilgrimage season.

Sayyed Nasrallah said: "Of the greatest meanings and values established by the holy rituals of the Hajj pilgrimage are mutual approach, coexistence, acquaintance, cooperation, and the paramount of all that is unity among Muslims. Millions of men and women pilgrims stand over there in Holy Mecca. Their God is One, their prophet is one, their Koran is one, their Qibla is one, their prayer is one and their rituals are one. Together, they perform the circumambulation of Kaaba and the other rituals of the pilgrimage including stoning Satan, offering sacrifices with the countless graces of Almighty Allah. The responsibility shouldered by pilgrims this year is greater and much more important than any previous year, due to what our Arab and Islamic countries are witnessing, from dangers, woes, conflicts, critical situations and serious challenges, on top of which are the continuous Israeli aggression against our people in Palestine, the American occupation of Iraq and the blatant foreign interference in our affairs and fates as well as the persistent effort to lay ground for sedition so that we kill each other and fight each other, and our occupier and enemy becomes our ally and friend and refuge sought by brothers against each other. This year's Hajj season should be an occasion for fraternity, understanding and harmony; an occasion to block any attempt to cause sedition among Muslims though a word, a slogan or a practice. Respecting the sanctity of the Holy land, the time and the event requires that every pilgrim feels responsible for preserving this blessed season. "

Israel Using Its Agents To Incite A Palestinian Civil War

By Ali Abunimah

President Carter has done what few American politicians
have dared to do: speak frankly about the Israel-Palestine
conflict. He has done this nation, and the cause of peace,
an enormous service by focusing attention on what he calls
"the abominable oppression and persecution in the occupied
Palestinian territories, with a rigid system of required
passes and strict segregation between Palestine's citizens
and Jewish settlers in the West Bank."

The 39th president of the United States, the most
successful Arab- Israeli peace negotiator to date, has
braved a storm of criticism, including the insinuation
from the pro-Israel Anti-Defamation League that his
arguments are anti-Semitic.

Mr. Carter has tried to mollify critics by suggesting that
his is not a commentary on Israeli policy inside Israel's
own borders, as compared with the West Bank, Gaza Strip
and East Jerusalem -- territories Israel occupied in 1967.
He told NPR, "I know that Israel is a wonderful democracy
with equal treatment of all citizens whether Arab or Jew.
And so I very carefully avoided talking about anything
inside Israel."

Given the pressure he has faced, it may be understandable
that Mr. Carter says this, but he is wrong. In addition to
nearly four million Palestinians living under Israeli rule
in the occupied territories, another one million live
inside Israel's pre-1967 borders. These Palestinians are
descendants of those who were not forced out or did not
flee when Israel was created in 1948.

They have nominal Israeli citizenship, and unlike blacks
in apartheid South Africa, they do vote for the country's
parliament. Yet this is where any sense of equality ends.
In Israel's history, no Arab-led party has ever been asked
to join a coalition government. And, among scores of
Jewish ministers, there has only ever been one Arab
minister, of junior rank.

Discrimination against non-Jewish citizens both informal
and legalized is systematic. Non-Jewish children attend
separate schools and live in areas that receive a fraction
of the funding of their Jewish counterparts. The results
can be seen in the much poorer educational attainment,
economic, health and life outcomes of Palestinian citizens
of Israel. Much of the land of the country, controlled by
the quasi-governmental Jewish National Fund, cannot be
leased or sold to non-Jews. This is similar in effect to
the restrictive covenants that in many U.S. cities once
kept nonwhites out of certain neighborhoods.

A 2003 law stipulates that an Israeli citizen may bring a
non- citizen spouse to live in Israel from anywhere in the
world, excluding a Palestinian from the occupied
territories. A civil rights leader in Israel likened it to
the American anti-miscegenation measures from the 1950s,
when mixed race couples had to leave the state of Virginia
to marry legally.

For Palestinians, the most blatant form of discrimination
is Israel's "Law of Return," that allows a Jewish person
from any country to settle in Israel. Meanwhile, family
members of Palestinian citizens of Israel, living in
exile, sometimes in refugee camps just a few miles outside
Israel's borders, are not permitted to set foot in the
country.

The rise of Avigdor Lieberman, the new deputy prime
minister, who openly advocates stripping Palestinians in
Israel of citizenship and transferring them outside the
state, reflects increasingly extremist politics. In
response to growing discrimination, leaders of
Palestinians inside Israel recently issued a report, "The
Future Vision of the Palestinian Arabs in Israel." It
calls for Israel to become a state where all citizens and
communities have equal rights, regardless of religion.
Many Israeli commentators reacted angrily, calling the
initiative an attempt to dismantle Israel as a "Jewish
state." However, even if Mr. Carter's recommendations are
implemented, and Israel withdraws from the territories
occupied in 1967, the struggle over the legitimacy of a
state that privileges one ethno- religious group at the
expense of another will not disappear.

As other divided societies, like South Africa, Northern
Ireland and indeed our own are painfully learning, only
equal rights and esteem for all the people, in the
diversity of their identities, can bring lasting peace.
This is an even harder discussion than the one President
Carter has courageously launched, but ultimately it is one
we must confront if peace is to come to Israel-Palestine.

By Juan Cole

"The US military conducted raids against the Badr Corps militia of the Shiite Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, in the course of which it arrested four Iranian officials. It had to let two of them go when it transpired that they were diplomats invited into Iraq by President Jalal Talabani, a close US ally. SCIRI and Badr were in exile in Iran for over two decades and have close ties to the Iranian regime. Nevertheless, the Bush administration hosted SCIRI leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim recently.

The US military has for the most part characterized the Badr corps as disciplined and not the main security problem in Iraq. US troops have never had an engagement with Badr. The Badr Corps has been accused of infiltrating the special police commandos of the Interior Ministry and of using that unit to engage in ethnic cleansing of Sunni Arabs they suspected of membership in the guerrilla movement.

That Badr had close ties to Iran was well known, so it is a little unclear what new developments could have provoked this raid.

The US has accused Iran of training Badr's Shiite rival, the Mahdi Army, in Lebanon and of providing it with shaped charges. That these officials were with Badr instead does not advance that case, and may weaken it.

Talabani's invitation is yet another wrinkle. I have long argued that Mam Jalal had close back channel relations with Tehran. Do the Peshmerga, the Kurdistan military, benefit from Iranian military advice, as well?

Stay tuned."

By Juan Cole

"1. Myth number one is that the United States "can still win" in Iraq......

2. "US military sweeps of neighborhoods can drive the guerrillas out." ......

3. The United States is best off throwing all its support behind the Iraqi Shiites....

4. "Iraq is not in a civil war," as paleo-conservative Fox commentator Bill O'Reilly insists......

5. "The second Lancet study showing 600,000 excess deaths from political and criminal violence since the US invasion is somehow flawed.".......

6. "Most deaths in Iraq are from bombings."......

7. "Baghdad and environs are especially violent but the death rate is lower in the rest of the country." ......

8. "Iraq is the central front in the war on terror.".....

9. "The Sunni Arab guerrillas in places like Ramadi will follow the US home to the American mainland and commit terrorism if we leave Iraq."......

10. "Setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is a bad idea."....."

Several explosions in Gaza in buildings connected to Al Aqsa Brigades and Hamas

Thanks to "hum" for posting this link.

"Date: 26 / 12 / 2006 Time: 12:40

Gaza - Ma'an - Unidentified men detonated a bomb in a trading establishment on Tuesday in the town of Beit Lahia in the northern Gaza Strip.

Eyewitnesses said that an armed group detonated a large bomb weighing dozens of kilograms, below the Madhoun trading establishment in Biet Lahia. The explosion caused great damage to the establishment.

The establishment is owned by the brother of the Al Aqsa Brigades leader, the main military wing of Fatah, in the northern Gaza Strip.

The explosion, which was heard throughout the area, caused in addition to the great losses of the establishment, damage to the surrounding houses and cars.

The witnesses added that the same armed men set alight two other stores owned by Hamas activists."

Were Russia and China given private assurances by Bush?

A Good Article
by Jorge Hirsch

"In the aftermath of the Dec. 23 United Nations Security Council unanimous vote imposing sanctions or Iran for failing to suspend uranium enrichment (see text of resolution here), one has to wonder: why did Russia and China go along with it? ......

.....Russia and China could have chosen to veto the resolution, or at least abstain. Instead, after negotiating to water it down, they voted for sanctions. Why?......

So I argue that Russia and China's vote is understandable only under the assumption that private discussions have been going on between them and the U.S. Their vote is understandable if in those private discussions:

* Bush strongly indicated that he would use military force if Russia and China didn't agree to support sanctions;
* Bush gave private assurances to Russia and China that he would not initiate military action against Iran without UNSC consent;
* Bush demanded that his private assurances remain private, arguing that making them public would undermine the diplomatic effort by reducing the pressure on Iran;
* Bush said that if his private assurances were made public deliberately or accidentally after the UNSC vote, they would no longer be binding.

A hint suggesting that such private assurances have been given is that Bush and Putin have publicly stressed the importance of a "unified position" on Iran. As long as there is a "unified position," Iran will not be attacked, because Putin would never agree to such a course of action.

Are Bush's Private Assurances Believable?

I will not make a judgment of how trustworthy President Bush is. However, the evidence clearly indicates that any private assurances given by Bush to Russia and China that he will not resort to military action against Iran were only given to induce them to support the UN action, and he has no intention of honoring them......

The final conditions for the impending military action are being rapidly put in place as we speak:

Dec. 19: U.S. is sending aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf to "warn" Iran
Dec. 20: Blair singles out Iran as the main obstacle to peace in the Middle East
Dec. 23: UNSC sanctions resolution passes

How will it get started? Either a Gulf-of-Tonkin-like incident, or an attack by Israel, or an incident in Iraq that will be blamed on Iran. Anything to provoke an Iranian response, argue "self-defense," and escalate the confrontation until it leads to taking out our big guns, nuclear weapons......."

Thirteen groups that favor chaos in Iraq
by Jon Basil Utley

"It's strange that little of the news coverage of Iraq addresses this question. Doesn't it seem obvious that some groups are fomenting the chaos? Getting tribes to fight each other is often easy. Most of them have some past injustice to avenge. The British Empire ruled much of its colonial world in this way, balancing off or favoring different tribes to rule others. In most of the Old World, tribes hated their neighbors more than foreign conquerors. See "Tribes, Veils, and Democracy."

Some 28 years ago I was in the Middle East with my mother, author of Will the Middle East Go West? [.pdf]. In Beirut we met John Cooley, the well-known and long-respected reporter for the Christian Science Monitor. The civil war in Lebanon was just getting started, and cooler heads were trying to head it off. Cooley then told us that every time there was a cease-fire some shadowy elements appeared to be shooting at both sides in an effort to get the fighting started up again. They succeeded, and the subsequent war nearly tore the nation apart.

Today there is a similar situation in Iraq. Much of the slaughter doesn't make sense among neighbors and friends. Peter Beinart of The New Republic wrote an excellent study of the past history of Iraq describing the unity of Sunnis and Shi'ites – indeed, the first Ba'athist leader was a Shia, though we think of Ba'athists, the party of Saddam, as all being Sunnis. But suppose some of the horrendous murder was being done by outsiders wanting to destroy Iraq by getting Sunnis and Shi'ites to wreak vengeance on each other. Tribal societies are particularly vulnerable to this kind of disruption.

With hindsight, one can argue that it was vital for Washington to prevent such a situation from occurring when the Army first occupied Baghdad, that the turning point was when the looting and chaos first started and U.S. forces did nothing to stop it. But today, for Washington to adopt a realistic policy, America must face the facts on the ground. Wishful thinking only brings disaster

Let's look at all the groups with an interest in continuing the chaos.

1) First, of course, there is al-Qaeda. Bin Laden must be laughing every day to see America's Army being hollowed out as the Army chief of staff describes. Further, every picture of Arabs being killed by Americans furthers bin Laden's objectives. There are too many ways bin Laden is "winning" to describe here; for details, see "36 Ways U.S. Is Losing the War on Terror."
2) Iraq's neighbors. Neoconservatives and Bush virtually threatened that Syria and Iran were the next in line to be attacked by America. This stupidity gave them every reason to want to see America tied down and weakened in Iraq for as long as possible.
3) The Likud Party in Israel. Although most Israelis want peace, their electoral system gives overwhelming power to their aggressive minorities. It is not hard to imagine that many want Arabs to fight and weaken one another. Israeli agents are very active with the Kurds, even training them. The U.S. occupation brought in Israeli advisers to teach American soldiers how to suppress Arab resistance. Israel has Arab speakers who can easily "mix in," as well as other resources. Dividing one's enemies is the oldest strategy in the book. Some Israelis would like to see a massive Sunni-Shia war spread to other Muslim nations.
4) The Kurds. They want a divided and weakened central government so they can gain their independence and take over the oil wealth of northern Iraq.
5) Shia and Kurdish militias benefit greatly from being trained and supplied by America. The so-called Iraqi army and police are mainly composed of Shia and Kurds. The longer the strife continues, the better equipped they become for an eventual showdown against the Sunnis, who also bear the brunt of American "pacification." Meanwhile, the Shia are gradually "ethnically cleansing" Baghdad of Sunnis.
6) Mercenaries, some paid as much as a thousand dollars a day. They want a good business to continue.
7) The Beltway Bombers and companies set up in Washington to hire retired commandos, Army Rangers, Navy SEALs. They have gained hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts from the Pentagon to help out in Iraq. There are indeed a reported 100,000 or so bodyguards, non-military consultants, advisers, support staff, etc., mostly paid by the U.S. Treasury.
8) Other oil-producing nations. All are happy to see most Iraq oil production off the market, which helps to keep the price of oil high. Russia certainly would benefit the most if other Mideast oil producers had "troubles," too.
9) Weapons manufacturers in many lands selling millions and paying big commissions to all sides in wars.
10) Gangster elements in Iraq, criminals who are thriving on the lawlessness, from petty thieves to big-time smugglers of oil and weapons.
11) All the nations that want to see the U.S. weakened and humiliated. Russians are no longer friendly to America, and many fear us. The Chinese were once on notice from powerful Washington interests that they would be next, once America finished with the Muslim world. The Chinese understand that manufacturers of warships, missiles, and planes need a "real" nation with vast resources to justify spending for their products; fighting shoeless guerrillas in caves and cellars won't cut it.
12) The Armageddon lobby in America, which sees chaos in Iraq as helping along their fantasies of hurrying up God to fulfill His prophecies (as they see them) to kill most of the human race while giving them a quick pass to Heaven.
13) Finally, there are smaller tribal elements in Iraq itself with their own agendas, which are almost impossible for Washington to discern.

This gives some idea of what America is up against. The electoral system foisted on Iraq by the early occupation authorities that divides power and establishes an almost dysfunctional government, e.g., favoring ethnic voting blocks, even without outside threats. The American objectives of pacification and "victory" look very difficult in view of all the above."

"NEW YORK (AP) - In a span of a few hours, 2,973 people were killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. In a span of 45 months, the number of American troops killed in Iraq exceeded that grim toll as the war continues.

The milestone in Iraq came on Christmas, nearly four years after the war began, according to a count by The Associated Press. In announcing the Monday deaths of three soldiers, the toll from those fighting the war surpassed the toll from those killed by terrorists in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania."



U.S. Troops Killed In Iraq.......2,980

"Coalition" Troops Killed........3,227

U.S. Troops Wounded..........22,401

by John Bellamy Foster

""The Failure of Empire" is the title I gave to the closing chapter of my book Naked Imperialism (Monthly Review Press, 2006). That chapter first appeared almost two years ago as a January 2005 article in Monthly Review. It began: "The United States is facing the prospect of a major defeat in Iraq that is likely to constitute a serious setback in the ongoing campaign to expand the U.S. empire." It ended: "The U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq may be creating the conditions for a civil war, lighting a powder keg under the entire Middle East."

These observations have been borne out by subsequent events. Yet, at a time when even the new Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, has stated that the United States is "not winning" the war in Iraq, it is important to recognize that there is also a sense in which the empire may not have entirely failed -- at least not yet. The war is almost universally viewed as a political and military disaster for the U.S. empire. Nevertheless, Washington is still hoping amidst the devastation to hold on to some of its long-term economic and strategic goals in Iraq. Realization of these will have made the war "worth it" from the standpoint of the U.S. ruling class, irrespective of the cost in lives and treasure.

There is no doubt what these spoils are: (1) control of Iraqi oil reserves (the second largest in the world), (2) "geopolitical gains" (or greater domination of the vital Middle East oil region), and (3) strengthening of U.S. global hegemony as a result of this new oil imperium. Crucial to the realization of these spoils, the United States has not only been forcibly occupying Iraq, but has also been looking to the future by building long-term (usually referred to as "permanent") military bases in Iraq where it plans to continue to locate substantial military forces and capabilities even after it has ostensibly "withdrawn" its troops. Such bases have but one undisguised purpose: the projection of U.S. imperial power over Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and the surrounding regions as part of the larger global projection of U.S power.

Little noticed or commented on in media discussions of the recently released Iraq Study Group Report is that one of its proposed "Milestones" for "the end of 2006-early 2007" is the Iraqi government's passage of a "new petroleum law." Washington not only helped to draft this law (in conjunction with representatives of the large oil corporations), but is playing a role in ensuring its passage. The full details of the new legislation are not available, but it is clear that it is intended to establish "production-sharing agreements." Production-sharing agreements are the contemporary version of the old imperial concessions system, giving foreign corporations control over the production and marketing of Iraqi oil reserves and the lion's share of the profits.......

......All of this points to the fact that the U.S. empire has not entirely failed in Iraq, at least not yet. From the standpoint of powerful vested interests in the United States, the Iraq War may still be seen as worth the costs. Oil after all is more valuable than blood, especially the blood of others (including the innocent). Iraq may be a political disaster but it remains an economic and geopolitical prize of incalculable dimensions. As a result the empire is not yet letting go. We remain in an age of Naked Imperialism."

"Abbas was due to report to the king in Amman Monday, Dec. 25, on his Saturday night talks with Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert and the steps offered to ease life in the Palestinian territories. When told that he had arrived in Amman without the Hamas PM, Abdullah called the meeting off. Observers report the humiliated Palestinian leader left the Jordanian capital abruptly. He has a date for Tuesday with President Hosni Mubarak in Cairo.

Meantime, Jordanian prime minister Maarouf Batih phoned Haniya and invited him to the palace. The Jordanian monarch is the first pro-Western Arab ruler to open his door to the Hamas prime minister. Egyptian and Saudi rulers have declined to receive him.

DEBKAfile’s sources report that the slap in the face to Abbas was directed with greater force at Olmert, who a week earlier visited Amman to report to the king on the benefits he proposed to pledge to Abbas at their forthcoming interview. Abdullah dismissed the package as too little and demanded far more drastic concessions to put the brakes on the Palestinians’ descent into civil war before it spilled over into his kingdom. He then offered to receive Olmert, Abu Mazen and Haniya in Amman and personally mediate their disputes. The Israeli prime minister rejected the offer on the spot. The king made no response.

It transpired later that Abdullah resolved there and then to have nothing to do with the Olmert-Abbas track, which he regards at best as a side-show of the main Palestinian power play. By standing Abbas up, he made this view plain to the Palestinians and the Arab world. He also showed the Israeli prime minister that his steps to consolidate Abbas were a pointless exercise, unless Hamas was simultaneously addressed."

By Yoel Marcus, HAARETZ

A Kiss Was Not Just A Kiss

"Was it a spontaneous kiss, like Haim Ramon's? Was it planned by both parties in advance of the summit dinner? Or was it a little surprise cooked up by Ehud Olmert? One way or another, Abu Mazen's face paled a little, as if he were about to faint, when our prime minister planted that pair of kisses on his cheeks.

From the mortified look on his face, the president of the Palestinian Authority was probably visualizing all the ridicule, anger and sarcastic comments that would be waiting for him at home: Over here we're starving, and you sit there eating osso buco and trading kisses with the leader of the Jews.

Okay, so it's all the rage nowadays at social gatherings of the penthouse and villa crowd to peck people on the check. According to my dictionary, there are two categories: the kissable and the kissers. But politicians in this country mainly shake hands, or slap each other on the back........

....Olmert's kiss was clearly a source of embarrassment for the two Fatah leaders, Abbas and Qureia. The smile that froze on their faces gave it away. So why did he do it? Couldn't he see that Hamas and Palestinian public opinion would eat them for lunch? Was it a local version of the Mafia custom where the rat fink in the family gets a kiss before he's blown away? It was a kiss of the "kiss the dust" variety.

It took Olmert eight hours to decide on the 33-Day War in Lebanon. I wonder how much time he spent thinking about "Operation Kiss." In what forum was this plan discussed? The Knesset plenary? The defense cabinet? Was it another one of Dan Halutz's ideas? Did someone hit the turbo button?

If the purpose of these kisses was to convey the impression that we have embarked on the path to dialogue and concessions, it wasn't very convincing. What did Olmert think? That kisses could compensate for his 10-month refusal to meet with Abu Mazen? Apparently so.

Like the European settlers, who bought diamonds and gold in Africa for mirrors and glass beads, Olmert tried to create the illusion of turning over a new leaf with gestures like hanging a Palestinian flag next to the Israeli flag, and addressing Abu Mazen as "president," which has always been taboo. As a bonus, Olmert presented his wife, Aliza. Abu Mazen could have kissed Her Majesty's hand, but being the gentleman that he is, he made do with a handshake.

At summit dinners like these, it is customary to exchange gifts and mementos. Olmert promised to unfreeze 100 million of the 500 million dollars belonging to the Palestinian Authority and hand it over to his guests, a dribble at a time. He promised to "work on" eliminating some of the checkpoints in the West Bank, and generally consider releasing a few dozen prisoners (mostly PLO members), out of the thousands that Israel is holding, before Gilad Shalit is set free.

What harm would it have done if Olmert had saved his kisses and, instead, given back all the frozen assets and released a large number of "valued" prisoners, in order to strengthen the "president" in his fight against Hamas and motivate him to do more to stop the Qassam rockets?

It could have been the start of a beautiful friendship, to quote the immortal parting words of the movie "Casablanca," if the two figures swallowed up in the dark of the night, heading into the unknown future, were not a pair of feeble leaders who want, but can't.

P.S. There was evening, there was morning, and four Qassams hit Israel. One Qassam for every kiss. "

"Occupied Jerusalem – A poll conducted by the Arabic daily Al-Quds revealed that Hamas still enjoys widespread support amongst the Palestinian population despite the siege imposed by the USA and Israel.

People were asked how they would vote in the event of early presidential and legislative elections to which 49.98% of those polled said that they would vote for Hamas while only 29.98% said they would vote for Fatah.

The poll also revealed that 4.56% would vote for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), 5.2% for the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), 1.26% for the People's Party and 9.44% for others.

The fact that this poll comes 9 months into a harsh economic siege imposed on Palestinians by the USA and Israel to punish them for their democratic choice shows that the aims of the siege were not realized and people still support Hamas and do not blame it for the siege and the resulting harsh economic situation."

By Linda S. Heard

"American and Israeli machinations have once more put this region under threat. Following months of barking from Bolton the bulldog the United Nations Security Council has unanimously passed a resolution designed to slow the Iranian nuclear programme.

It isn't as comprehensive as the former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton and his masters would have liked, concentrating, as it does, on banning the import and export of nuclear-related materials and freezing the assets of certain companies, but it's the best he could prize out of reluctant China and Russia.

Moscow held out the longest and only caved in after a call made by George W. Bush to the Russian President Vladimir Putin. One is driven to wonder about other topics discussed: Russia's proposed WTO membership, perhaps?

Israel is ecstatic at this rap over the knuckles and the Bush administration is already touting the resolution as a positive first step towards comprehensive sanctions.......

In other words, instead of opening up, Iran feels unfairly singled out and under siege. It's little wonder, therefore, that it's poised to withdraw further into its own shell and accelerate its nuclear programme with the addition of 52,000 centrifuges.

In the meantime, Britain's Tony Blair has become an expert flip-flopper.

Just a few weeks ago he was advocating unconditional direct talks with Iran but then he went to Washington where he was assigned a new message: Iran is the obstacle to peace in the Middle East by supporting terrorists in Iraq, attempting to oust Lebanon's democratically-elected government, and denying the Holocaust.

Moderate Muslim states should unite in combating extremist regimes, such as Iran's, Blair said.

Blair neglected to mention that like Iraq during the final leg of Saddam's tenure Iran has begun selling its oil in euros, thus undermining the petrodollar.

In the meantime, the US and Britain are moving warships to the Gulf to join the aircraft carrier Eisenhower and the US is set to send more troops to neighbouring Iraq, despite General John Abizaid's insistence that more isn't necessary. This is naked aggression with the possibility of a disastrous outcome - yet another all out war.

Right-wing Israeli elements that view Tehran as an existential threat have been pushing for a preemptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities for some time, warning that if the US doesn't move Israel might do the job itself. The US Vice-President Dick Cheney has made similar warning noises in the past.......

If either the US and its allies or Israel decides to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, comparisons with Iraq will end there. The sectarian conflict that has possessed Iraq will likely ignite the entire region where nations will be asked to take sides. Worse, in some cases public sentiments and governmental policies could deviate.

Washington and Tel Aviv, aided by London, are taking this region on a collision course. Arab League Secretary-General Amr Mousa once warned that the invasion of Iraq would open the gates to Hell.

They opened alright but if there is war with Iran they may take a long time to swing shut. "

PA official: Haniyeh, Abbas will meet in Jordan later this week

"Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh will meet this week in Amman, the Palestinian government spokesman said Monday.

"The Jordanian prime minister has extended an official invitation from his majesty King Abdullah to Prime Minister Haniyeh to visit Jordan and to meet with President Abu Mazen [Abbas] to discuss the latest developments and the issues of difference," Ghazi Hamad said.

"Prime Minister Haniyeh has welcomed the invitation," he said. "Arrangements are under way to agree on the date.""

***

What comes next? Olmert mediating between Abbas and Haniyyah? Why not! If Haniyyah is willing to let the puppet king mediate, why not go directly to the puppeteer and eliminate the middleman!

What are you going to negotiate Mr. Haniyyah? How many of the Badr Brigade will be trained by U.S. advisors in Jordan? How many will come to Gaza to install Generalissimo Dahlan in power? By the way, don't forget to visit their training base while you are in Jordan.

What a farce and a disgrace this PA has become. It is time to flush it down the drain; the stench is unbearable and no amount of air freshener can cover it up.

بيع الأوهام في لقاء أولمرت وعباس

بقلم : إبراهيم أبو الهيجاء

البضاعة ذاتها يجري بيعها لنا من قبل إسرائيل، والمفاوضون الفلسطينيون الذين يتشددون مع "حماس" على كل فاصلة وكلمة في اتفاقات حكومة الوحدة، نجدهم يرضون فقط بالتقاط الصور مع الوفد الإسرائيلي، دون أي انجازات حقيقية. ومرة أخرى نسمع قصة الأموال والأسرى والحواجز وإعادة الانتشار والمبعدين، وكأن ذاكرتنا ضعيفة فيظن البعض أننا نسينا مباحثات طابا التي جرت أيضا بين (اولمرت – عباس)، والتي شكلت على إثرها اللجان، ووعدنا فيها بعسل النحل، فلم يبق منها سوى لسعات النحل.

أفهم أن يكون "اولمرت" صريحاً مع شعبه، فيقول إن اللقاء جاء من أجل تقوية مكانة الرئيس أبو مازن بالمال والسلاح والكثير من الوعود الكلامية، أستطيع أن أفهم مقصد "اولمرت" في لقاء أبو مازن، سيما وهو يعايش تدنيا انتخابيا، وهجوما من كل النخب الإسرائيلية المثقفة يمينا ويساراً.

ولكنني بصراحة لا أستطيع أن أبرر أو أفهم خطوة الرئيس عباس، لن أتحدث هنا عن الثمن المقابل، فمن الواضح أنه ثمن بخس، ولا يصب إلا في اتجاه ما يعزز استقواء طرف فلسطيني بطرف خارجي، وهو ببساطة يخدم أولا وأخيرا أمن إسرائيل، وكل ذلك فقط لإضعاف قوة حماس وتشديد الطوق عليها، والإثبات أن برنامجها، وبالتالي مقاومتها، لن تخرج أسرى ولن تفرج عن أموال ... فقط هي الطريقة التفاوضية والمقاومة السلمية واللقاءات الحميمة ما يخرج الأسرى ويعيد الأرض ويؤمن الرواتب ...

وهذا عبث وهو اجترار للتفكير الحزبي الضيق، الذي يخشى من حماس أكثر من خشيته من إسرائيل، وهو يصب في ذات التفكير الذي يريد أن يجرنا لانتخابات مبكرة، ويفرض علينا أن نوافق على شروط الرباعية وليس الوطنية، وإلا فالسلاح والتعسف في الصلاحيات الرئاسية جاهز لردع أي مخالف ومعاند.

ورغم كل ذلك، فإننا نستطيع القول إن أي إنجاز يمكن أن يحققه الرئيس الفلسطيني فإن الفضل سيعود فيه إلى "حماس"، لأن التحركات الإسرائيلية المتسارعة والضغوط الأميركية المتوافقة، تهدف أساسا إلى قطع الطريق على تحقيق "حماس" لشرعية، تتجاوز الشروط الرباعية وتنسجم مع الشروط الوطنية، وتحت هذا الضغط يتحركون ويريدون إرضاء الشعب الفلسطيني، الذي ملّ من الأعيب التفاوضية والفساد المتحالف معها .... وأصبح لا يرى إلا خيار المقاومة سبيلا لتحصيل حقوقه التي ضاعت في مدريد وما بعدها، وتضيع الآن في الجدار والاستيطان، الذي يبدو أن المفاوض الفلسطيني قد نسيه ... وهو يريد تضييع حقوقنا مرة أخرى في عناوين مستهلكة وحقوق كانت من قبل مكتسبة حتى في ظل أوسلو الرديء.

وأخشى أن يقول المفاوض الفلسطيني لحماس عندما تسجل احتجاجها على مفاوضاته مع اولمرت: "ألم نتفق أن المفاوضات من صلاحيات الرئيس"، فيجري تناسي أن الاتفاق كل لا يتجزأ ... ويجري التغافل عن أرضية التوافق الوطني المسجلّة بوثيقة الوفاق الوطني ...فيقتبس المفاوض الفلسطيني ما يريده من التوافقات الوطنية، ويلقي بما يشاء في الحاوية ... تلك هي الكارثة الوطنية بعينها، وذلكم هو الاستفراد، وهو من قبل ومن بعد، تعدي على الرغبة الشعبية وانتقاص للتمثيل الانتخابي المعبّر عنها ... وإن جرى تكبيلها على يد اولمرت ذاته، الذي يتحاور معه عباس الآن.

Five wounded in cluster bomb explosions in southern Lebanon

By The Associated Press

"Cluster bombs wounded five people, including two children, in southern Lebanon during the past two days, said hospital and security officials Monday.

Shadi Fuad Mahdi, 12, and Ahmed Hassan Makki, 13, were playing outside their house in the village of Qaaqaiyet al-Jisr, near Nabatiyeh, on Monday when a cluster bomb exploded and wounded them, said a Lebanese security official in Nabatiyeh, who spoke on condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the press.

It was not disclosed whether one of the boys stepped on the bomb or they were playing with it. They were both admitted to hospital.

In the southern port city of Tyre, the owner of Najem Hospital, Dr. Jawad Najem, said three men whom he did not name were being treated for wounds received from a cluster bomb explosion on Sunday. He did not say what caused
the bomb to detonate.

At least 28 people have died in cluster bomb and land mine explosions in Lebanon since Israel's war with Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas ended in a cease-fire on August 14.

Last week, a Hezbollah fighter was killed in a cluster bomb explosion in south Lebanon, and earlier this month two Lebanese soldiers were killed by a land mine while they were trying to defuse ordnance left behind by Israeli troops.

The United Nations and human rights groups have accused Israel of laying mines and dropping as many as 4 million cluster bombs on Lebanon during the summer's war.

UN ordnance clearing experts have said that up to 1 million cluster bombs failed to explode and continue to threaten civilians.

Lebanon's south has long been riddled with land mines, laid by retreating Israeli soldiers who pulled out of the region in 2000 after an 18-year occupation. Hezbollah has also planted mines to ward off Israeli forces."

By Mr. Fish

(Click on to enlarge)

Abbas & Dahlan...

U.S., European officials visit Fatah training base in Jordan

By Reuters

"United States and European officials have visited a base in Jordan where Fatah is training troops to reinforce Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in any showdown with Hamas, sources familiar with the visits said on Monday.

Up to 1,000 members of the Jordan-based Badr Brigade would initially be deployed in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as part of U.S.-backed efforts to strengthen the moderate Palestinian leader's hold on power.

The Bush administration is seeking congressional support to provide up to $100 million to bolster Abbas' presidential guard and expand his control over strategic border crossings.

The United States recently sent a mid-level U.S. official to visit a Badr training facility in Jordan for informal discussions, a European diplomat and other sources said.

Sources familiar with the plan said U.S. money would not be used to provide the presidential guard with "lethal" equipment.

But Israeli officials say Washington has been instrumental in helping organize shipments of guns and ammunition to the presidential guard from Egypt and Jordan.

The sources said Badr's deployment may not start for several months because the force needs substantial amounts of new military equipment and training. Badr would reinforce Abbas's presidential guard and other Fatah-dominated security services.

U.S. officials declined to comment on the matter."

Anyone who looks at the Israeli press can easily spot planted, fabricated stories intended to serve Israeli and neocon objectives. One of these objectives is to portray Hamas as a common enemy of Israel and the U.S. This has been part of the successful neocon/Israeli effort since 9/11 to portray Israel's enemies as enemies of the U.S. and to employ U.S. blood to fight Israel's wars. The sequel started with Iraq but will not end there. Israel and its neocon allies want to move on against Syria, Iran, Lebanon and Hamas.

This story on the Ynet web site (of the Israeli paper Yedioth Ahronoth) claimed "Members of Hamas are debating whether to carry out attacks against the United States and may hit American targets if the US continues to support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' call for new elections, Hamas leaders told WND in a series of interviews." It went on:

"Abu Abdullah told WND Hamas has not yet decided to attack the US, "but one cannot guarantee that this will be the situation if the conspiracy of chasing our government succeeds."

Asked which US targets Hamas would hit, Abu Abdullah replied, "Do you think that I can give you an answer to this question? I can say that the Middle East is full of American targets and the world has had the occasion to learn what are the weapons of the anti-American forces in the region." "

And it added this:

"While the latest Hamas threats warned of attacks against American interests in the region, some terrorism experts and senior security officials previously told WND Hamas has cells inside the US that are technically capable of attacking within the country.

"We have information Hamas agents have been on US soil the past few years and that the group may currently have up to 100 agents operating inside America," an FBI counterterrorism agent in New York told WND last October."

This is pure nonsense and phony as a three-dollar bill. Anyone familiar with Hamas' policies recognizes this as a bold-faced lie. Hamas has never interferred in the affairs of any Arab regimes, even those hostile to it, let alone attack the U.S.

Hamas today denied this fabricated story.

Here is the statement from Hamas:

"Gaza - Spokesmen for Hamas Movement and its armed wing the Qassam Brigades on Monday denied allegations published by a Hebrew daily that the Movement was planning to attack American targets.

Fawzi Barhum, the Hamas spokesman in the Gaza Strip, said that the report by Yedioth Ahronoth, quoting an American paper, was completely untrue.

"Our battle is with the Zionist occupiers only and we will not target any country," he emphasized, warning that publishing such "wrong information" was aimed at finding justifications to attack Hamas and its leaders.

For his part, Abu Obaida, the Hamas armed wing's spokesman, denied the report, affirming that it was quoting an illusionary Qassam spokesman.

He underlined that none was allowed to speak on behalf of the armed wing except the official spokesman.

"Hamas limits its battle to resisting occupation inside Palestine and its armed wing has no military activity outside Palestine, we have not considered the matter and do not have the intention to do so," he concluded."

Get Him! He Is Trying To Infiltrate!

By Mazin Qumsiyeh

"It is at Christmastime that the sometimes-beautiful and sometimes-poignant childhood memories of Bethlehem haunt me and other Palestinian Christians most vividly.

Born in Shepherd's Field near Bethlehem to a Lutheran mother and a Greek Orthodox father, I grew up feeling lucky because we celebrated two Christmases. The Christmas season was a time of family gatherings around kerosene heaters where our fingers were cold but our hearts were warm and stomachs full.

Today, Christmas is a time to reflect on the tragedy that has befallen this most famous of little towns. Israel militarily occupied Bethlehem in 1967, but the landscape had begun to change well before that. In 1948, Bethlehem became home to thousands of Palestinian refugees after more than 750,000 people were driven from their homes in what became Israel. Palestinians were forbidden to return, and the cramped refugee camps of Dheisheh and Aida on the outskirts of Bethlehem remain testaments to this nearly 60-year legacy of dispossession.

After 1967, Israel built new illegal settlements on annexed Palestinian public and agricultural lands and Israeli-only roads to connect these settlements to Israel and one another. We could do nothing but watch as increasing portions of our homeland became off-limits to Palestinians. The only forested region of East Jerusalem, Jabal Abu Ghneim -- where I used to picnic and walk almost daily -- became the Jewish settlement of Har Homa.

Today, Bethlehem is surrounded by the settlements of Gilo, Har Gilo, and a new settlement near Rachel's tomb. The tomb is holy to Christians, Muslims and Jews but is now off limit to Palestinians, including relatives of the hundreds of Palestinian Muslims buried there.

Since 2002, Bethlehemites have faced the enormous human costs of a massive, concrete segregation wall. During my visit last July, I noticed that the route of the wall zigzagged around Bethlehem, placing fertile Palestinian agricultural lands on the "Israeli side" of the wall. The wall went straight through centuries-old villages - separating Palestinian families from each other and from their jobs, hospitals, schools, churches and mosques.

Many of my relatives have lost jobs in Jerusalem, a mere six miles away, because it is virtually impossible for West Bank Palestinians to obtain permits to enter Jerusalem. Even with a permit, checkpoints make travel unpredictable and often impossible, precluding reliable work attendance. Although I have an American passport, I am denied entry to East Jerusalem, where I taught high school. At Bethlehem University, where my brother has taught mathematics for 25 years, the wall and checkpoints mean many faculty and students can no longer make it to school. The biblical and literal path from Nazareth to Bethlehem is blocked by checkpoints and thirty-foot high slabs of concrete.

I am saddened when I see how Bethlehem has been transformed. A once-thriving community is stifled, isolated and desperate. Tourism has plummeted, jobs are scarce and Christian Palestinian families are leaving. At Christmastime, typically a period of joy and hope, this grim reality hits especially hard.

Israel's desire to acquire maximum geography with minimum Palestinian demography is the root of the suffering afflicting the Holy Land. Amnesty International has observed that the peace processes failed because Israel has ignored human rights, including the right of native Palestinians to return to their homes and lands. There is now a broad international consensus (with the exceptions of the US and Israeli governments) on the danger to international peace and security posed by Israel's continued violations of human rights and international law.

Although Israel's actions are given diplomatic and financial cover by my adopted country of America, I feel hopeful. Jimmy Carter's new book "Palestine: Peace not Apartheid" marks the first time a major US politician recognized publicly the reality of discrimination against the Christians and Muslims of Palestine. The Iraq study group has recommended resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as critical to regional stability. People are increasingly pausing to reconsider the value of our government's unconditional support for Israel. We need our politicians to follow suit. In this season celebrating the birth of the Prince of Peace, let us all resolve to pray and work for justice in the holiest of lands.

May this holiday season and the new year bear the fruits of the collective hard work for peace with justice to all people."

After eight long months they finally meet (Boris Dikerman)

by W. Patrick Lang and Ray McGovern
(W. Patrick Lang, a retired Army colonel, served with Special Forces in Vietnam, as a professor at West Point and as defense intelligence officer for the Middle East. Ray McGovern was also an Army infantry/intelligence officer before his 27-year career as a CIA analyst. Both are with Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity)

"......Virtually everyone concedes that the war cannot be won militarily. And yet the so-called ''neoconservatives'' whom Bush has listened to in the past are arguing strongly for a surge in troop strength. A generation from now, our grandchildren will have difficulty writing history papers on the oxymoronic debate now raging on how to surge/withdraw our troops into/from the quagmire in Iraq.

The generals in Iraq may have already been ordered by the White House to ''get with the program'' on surging. Just as they ''never asked for more troops'' at earlier stages of the war, they are likely to be instant devotees of a surge, once they smell the breezes from Washington. As for Gates, it is a safe bet that whatever personal input he may dare to offer will be dwarfed by Cheney's. Taking issue with ''deciders'' has never been Gates' strong suit.

Whether Gates realizes it or not, the U.S. military is about to commit hara-kiri by ''surge.'' The generals should know that, once an ''all or nothing'' offensive like the ''surge'' apparently contemplated has begun, there is no turning back.

It will be ''victory'' over the insurgents and the Shiite militias or palpable defeat, recognizable by all in Iraq and across the world. Any conceivable ''surge'' would not turn the tide -- would not even stem it. We saw that last summer when the dispatch of 7,000 U.S. troops to reinforce Baghdad brought a fierce counter-surge -- the highest level of violence since the Pentagon began issuing quarterly reports in 2005.

A major buildup would commit the U.S. Army and Marine Corps to decisive combat in which there would be no more strategic reserves to be sent to the front. As Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Conway pointed out Monday, ``If you commit your reserve for something other than a decisive win, or to stave off defeat, then you have essentially shot your bolt.''

It will be a matter of win or die in the attempt. In that situation, everyone in uniform on the ground will commit every ounce of their being to ''victory,'' and few measures will be shrunk from.

Analogies come to mind: Stalingrad, the Bulge, Dien Bien Phu, the Battle of Algiers.

It will be total war with the likelihood of all the excesses and mass casualties that come with total war. To force such a strategy on our armed forces would be nothing short of immoral, in view of predictable troop losses and the huge number of Iraqis who would meet violent injury and death. If adopted, the ''surge'' strategy will turn out to be something we will spend a generation living down........"

"Gaza - Salah Bardawil, the spokesman of the Hamas-affiliated change and reform parliamentary bloc, on Sunday charged PA chief Mahmoud Abbas with impeding national dialogue and with planning military coup against the PA government.

Bardawil, in a press release, said that Abbas was preparing to topple the legitimate PA government using military force, citing the PA chief's constant hampering of national dialogue.

He drew the attention to the increasing deployment of presidential guards in the PA-run lands and to exploiting the constitutional court to issue rulings against the Hamas-led government.

The spokesman noted, however, that mediation efforts were being exerted by the Egyptians, the OIC, the PFLP and MP Mustafa Al-Barghouthi to return to dialogue with the aim of forming a unity government based on the national concord document.

Meanwhile, Hebrew daily Yedioth Ahronoth said on Sunday that Israel had allowed Egypt and Jordan to supply Abbas' presidential guards with around 5,000 machineguns and millions of bullets.

The paper further said that the Israeli intelligence had advised Olmert to supply Abbas with money to purchase needed combat means for the presidential guards, which Olmert did through agreeing to channel 100 million dollars of PA frozen money to Abbas.

The PA chief is scheduled to visit Jordan on Monday to discuss recent developments with Jordanian officials.

For its part, the AMB, the armed wing of the Fatah faction, charged Abbas' entourage with diverting Fatah from its original path.

The AMB statement lashed out at those who criticized Farouk Kaddoumi, Fatah secretary general and PLO political department head, for refusing Abbas' call for early elections.

It heaped praise on Kaddoumi as one of the vanguards of Palestinian constants."

(Click on to enlarge)

"Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin told the cabinet Sunday that should elections be held in the Palestinian Authority, Fatah's chances of winning would be close to zero.

Diskin said during Sunday's weekly cabinet meeting that the Fatah faction is in bad shape, and therefore Israel should expect Hamas to register a sweeping victory.

The Shin Bet chief also warned the cabinet that should the Israel Defense Forces begin targeting militants who are launching Qassam rockets, the Gaza Strip cease-fire would collapse within days because Hamas would renew its participation in attacks on Israel."

Happy Birthday Jesus!
Sorry About That Ugly Thing In Your City Of Birth Bethlehem; It Is The Apartheid Wall Built By Israel.

"Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday asked cabinet ministers for their position on a new Palestinian request for the release of prisoners by next week, Israel Radio reported.

At the weekly cabinet meeting, Olmert told the ministers that in their Saturday meeting Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas had asked for an Israeli gesture ahead of the Eid al-Adha festival.

So far Israel has maintained it would not release any Palestinians before abducted Israel Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit is released by Hamas.

Three cabinet minister said in response that the release of prisoners before Shalit is freed should be considered as a goodwill gesture that would boost Abbas' position on the Palestinian street, according to the radio.

Vice Premier Shimon Peres said he sees no reason why a gesture should not be made to Abbas in order to support the moderates in the PA.

Defense Minister Amir Peretz said there is room for such a move before Shalit's release.

Transportation Minister and former defense minister Shaul Mofaz said the proposal should be considered. Israel has made such gestures in the past and that the PA chairman should be supported, Mofaz was quoted by the radio as saying. "

"Gaza - The PA ministry of refugees' affairs has called on the UN to swiftly transfer the Palestinian refugees residing in Iraq to Syria and Jordan to preserve their threatened lives.

The ministry, in a press release on Saturday, stressed that those refugees should remain under UN-supervision until their return to their homeland, and affirmed that they should remain near their homeland Palestine.

It urged the UN to shoulder its responsibility towards those refugees and to provide protection for them in face of the daily murder and arrest threats that ran contrary to human rights.

The ministry appealed to the UN secretary general and to the Arab League secretary general to immediately step in and solve the problem of Palestinian refugees in Iraq who have been stranded at the Syrian-Iraqi borders for months in tragic conditions.

Palestinian refugees in Iraq are the target of merciless murder, displacement and persecution at the hands of local militias forcing many families to flee their homes and seek refuge in nearby Arab countries that denied them entry, the ministry pointed out, adding that those families including a big number of children were trapped at the no-man's-land area without protection or help.

The ministry said that it was and still is pursuing contacts with a number of countries and concerned parties to wrap up this issue and to halt the Palestinian refugees' suffering in Iraq and those trapped at the borders with Jordan and Syria. "

(Click on cartoon to enlarge)
By Mike Luckovich

صهاينة ... أكثر من الصهاينة..!

بقلم :زياد أبو غنيمة

أفهم أن يوقـِّع الرئيس بوش قانوناً يحظر إرسال أموال إلى الحكومة الفلسطينية الحماسية إلا إذا اعترفت بالكيان الصهيوني المجرم ، فذلك يأتي في غمرة السعار الذي يمارسه الصهاينة وخدَّامهم من المتصهينين الأمريكان والأوروبيين الذين يرتفع جعيرهم مطالبين حركة المقاومة الإسلامية في فلسطين "حماس" بالتخلي عن سلاحها المقاوم للاحتلال ، وبالاعتراف بشرعية الكيان الصهيوني المغتصب لفلسطين.

أفهم أن ينخَّ مجلس الأمن والاتحاد الأوروبي واللجنة الرباعية وميركل وشيراك وبلير ورايس وسولانا وغيرهم من المتصهينين لضغوط الأمريكان والصهاينة فينضمُّوا إلى جوقة التزمير والتطبيل المطالبة حماساً بالتخلي عن سلاح مقاومتها وبالاعتراف بشرعية الكيان المغتصب لفلسطين...!

لكن الذي لم أستطع فهمه هذه الشراسة التي يبديها رئيس السلطة الأوسلوية وبطانة العمالة التي تحيط به ، وقبضايات حرسه الرئاسي الفتحاوي وفرق الموت الدحلانية الفتحاوية في تصعيد تآمرهم على حركة حماس وحكومة حماس ونواب حماس الى حد أن يهرع عباس إلى لقاء المجرم أولمرت أمس، في الوقت الذي يصفق بابه في وجه رئيس وزراء الشعب الفلسطيني ووزراءه ، وإلى حد إطلاق العنان لزعران أوسلو لمحاولة الإنقلاب بقوة السلاح على حماس وحكومتها لأنها تصرُّعلى رفض الإعتراف بشرعية الكيان الصهيوني المجرم ..!!!!

لكن الذي لم استطع فهمه هو هذا الحماس الذي يبديه بعض رغالات النظام العربي والإسلامي الرسمي وكلُّ مارينزات الأمركة والصهينة في صحافتنا وفضائياتنا المحسوبة زورا على العروبة في ترديد مطالب الصهاينة والمتصهينين وينضمُّوا إلى الجوقة إياها مطالبين بل وضاغطين أحياناً على حماس للتخلي عن سلاحها المقاوم وبالاعتراف بشرعية الكيان المغتصب لفلسطين..!

ما مصلحة هذا النظام العربي أو ذاك في مجاراة الصهاينة والمتصهينين في ممارسة الضغوط على حماس بعد أن انحازت لها ولخيارها المقاوم أغلبية الجماهير الفلسطينية وغالبية الجماهير العربية والإسلامية وشرفاء العالم ...؟

لماذا يجاري هذا النظام العربي أو ذاك الصهاينة والمتصهينين ولا يجاري إرادة العروبة والإسلام التي جسَّدتها إرادة أهلنا في فلسطين بانحيازها إلى حماس ومقاومتها في مواجهة الصهاينة والمتصهينين...!

لماذا لم يتنازل ، حتى الآن ، رغالات النظام العربي الرسمي برفع سماعة الهاتف ليدعوا إسماعيل هنيَّة لزيارتهم كما يدعون غونداليزا وأولمرت ومارينزات الأمركة والتصهين في سلطة عباس ..؟

أما آن لمارينزات الأمركة والصهينة في إعلامنا أن يقولوا خيراً أويخرسوا..؟ لماذا يزايدون على الصهاينة والمتصهينين في مقالاتهم ومشاركاتهم الفضائية وهم يرعدون ويزبدون مطالبين حماساً بالتخلي عن سلاحها المقاوم للإحتلال وبالاعتراف بشرعية الكيان المغتصب لفلسطين..؟

كيف يكون عربياً من يدعو حماساً للاعتراف بشرعية الإغتصاب الصهيوني لأرض الإسراء والمعراج وقبلة المسلمين الأولى ..؟

لماذا ، ولمصلحة من ، ومقابل ماذا ، يطالب مارينزات السلطة الأوسلوية الفتحاوية ورغالات النظام العربي حماساً بما يطالبها به الصهاينة والمتصهينون في أمريكا وأوروبا ومجلس أمنهم ولجنتهم الرباعية واتحادهم الأوروبي..؟

لقد سقطت كل أوراق التوت عن كل أولئك الذين انتقلوا من خندق أمتهم إلى خندق أعداء أمتهم ، وهل من سقوط أكبر من عناق عباس للمجرم أولمرت بعد أيام قليلة من محاولة قبضايات حرسه الرئاسي الأوسلوي إغتيال رئيس وزراء الشعب الفلسطيني المجاهد إسماعيل هنية ..؟؟؟؟

Iraq: At least 13 killed in another bloody day in Iraq: Clashes between Iraqi security forces and a powerful Shi'ite militia left five people, including four policemen, dead and wounded 17 others in Samawa, police sources said.

US air strike kills five: Two women and a 4-year-old child were reportedly among the dead.

U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq: Three U.S. Marines and one sailor were killed in Iraq's overwhelmingly Sunni Islamic Anbar Province Saturday, the U.S. military said.

U.S. commanders in Iraq push troop increase: Top U.S. military commanders in Iraq have decided to recommend an increase in the number of U.S. occupation forces there, the Los Angeles Times reported on Saturday, citing a defense official familiar with the plan.

Troop Levels Unknown: - Despite all the talk about just what kind of troop levels the U.S. should maintain, it's not clear anyone knows the size of the Iraqi force, Rep. Christopher Shays said today in his report to the White House and Pentagon on findings from his trip to Iraq.

Iraqi Shiites seize Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad: As the United States debates what to do in Iraq, this country's Shiite majority is already moving toward its own solution

Shiite Cleric Won't Support Coalition: Iraq's most revered Shiite cleric withheld support Saturday for a U.S.-backed plan to build a coalition across sectarian lines, Shiite lawmakers said, jeopardizing hopes that such a show of political unity could help stem the country's deadly violence.

Archbishop attacks US, Britain on Iraq: THE spiritual head of the Anglican Church launched an outspoken attack on the British and US governments on Saturday, saying their "ignorant" policy in Iraq has put Christians in the region at risk.

U.S. to maintain long presence in Gulf region: Gates: An increased U.S. naval presence in the Gulf is not a response to any action by Iran but a message to all countries that the United States will keep its regional footprint "for a long time", Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Friday.

Will Iraq's Oil Blessing Become a Curse?: The Iraqi government is considering a new oil law that could give private oil companies greater control over its vast reserves. In light of rampant violence and shaky democratic institutions, many fear the law is being pushed through hastily by special interests behind closed doors.

Iraq: At least 27 killed in ongoing violence in Iraq: Two policemen were killed when a roadside bomb targeted their patrol in central Samarra, 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, police said.

Five more US soldiers die; Gates ends Iraq visit: The U.S. military reported the deaths of five more soldiers in Iraq on Friday as Defense Secretary Robert Gates ended a visit aimed at finding a new strategy to curb violence and allow U.S. troops to withdraw.

Iraq town has little faith in US trial of Marines: "This is a show trial just to show that the Americans are doing something to be fair with Iraqis but it's nothing more than that," he said.

Did an American fire on Iraqis for sport?: U.S. security contractors allege their supervisor was ‘out of control’.