Thousands of Palestinian orphans protest Israeli army looting of their food

From Khalid Amayreh in Hebron

"Thousands of Palestinian orphans on Tuesday took to the streets in this southern West Bank town to protest recent raids by the Israeli occupation army of their orphanages and boarding schools.

Hundreds of Israeli troops, backed up by armored carriers, raided the Islamic Charitable Society in downtown Hebron earlier this week , vandalizing property and looting hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of food materials, clothes, shoes and furniture donated by local and foreign donors for the benefit of the orphans.

The charitable society, the largest in Palestine, runs two orphanages and several boarding schools, which cater for as many as 7000 children who have lost either or both parents......

On 6 March, Israeli army troops stormed buildings containing food and clothes inventories, looting large amounts of frozen food, dairy products, clothes and shoes as well as refrigerators and kitchen appliances, local officials and eyewitnesses said. The looted material were to be used to feed and cloth the orphans.

Ahmed Farrah, a charity official, denied vehemently Israeli insinuations that the charity was run by Hamas. “We are a charitable society. We have nothing to do with politics. We have been functioning since 1964, before the Israeli occupation, and the Israeli army and intelligence services investigated us numerous times and they never found any evidence suggesting any illegal activities.

“So, the real reason for this hateful campaign is that they want to torment us and weaken the Palestinian society. I think it is an expression of hatred toward Islam and Muslims. Israel today spearheads an ugly war against our religion.”.....

The army confiscated property, including an orphanage, two schools, a supermarket and several multi-story buildings as well as four buses. The army brought in huge trucks for moving the looted materials, including computers, cabinets, chairs, kitchen appliances and teaching aids to a nearby army base.....

One local writer and poet accused the Palestinian Authority of Ramallah of “conniving and coordinating with Israel to close the orphanages and boarding schools.”

“I have no doubt that (PA interior minister) Abdul Razzak al Yahya is behind all of this,” said the man who asked for anonymity. “They are acting like quislings for Israel. Otherwise why are they silent while 7000 orphans are being dumped onto the streets?”"

Iran still a target?

By Stephen Kinzer
(Stephen Kinzer is author of "All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror)

Baltimore Sun

"In a reality-based world, the idea that the United States should attack Iran would by now seem most implausible. Not only is the Iraq war taking a terrible financial and human toll, but American intelligence agencies have concluded that Iran is not building nuclear weapons. Iran should logically fall into the same category as Cuba, Venezuela, Syria and North Korea - countries that behave in ways the U.S. dislikes but do not pose such imminent threats that they must be bombed.

Unfortunately, though, reality is not what guides the Bush administration. It is still driven by the impulses that led to the Iraq invasion. This means that the world may wake up any morning between now and Jan. 20 to news that U.S. missiles are falling on Iran. Ominously, Adm. William J. Fallon, who had strongly opposed the idea of attacking Iran, announced his early retirement yesterday.

The fact that most Americans seem to believe the threat of such an attack has receded may actually make it more possible. Officials in Washington could easily take the lack of sustained public and political protest as a sign that citizens don't really care whether the U.S. launches this new war......."

Fallon ouster marks crucial Neocon victory and makes war against Iran very likely

A Very Good Piece
By The Vineyard of the Saker

".....In this context, the ouster of Fallon is without any doubt a major Neocon success: not only has the last senior US commander opposed to an attack on Iran been fired, but a major player of the "Old Anglo Guard" as been evicted from his power base. Regardless of who actually succeeds Dubya in the White House, the entire military command is now firmly back in Neocon hands. Ditto for both houses of Congress and most of the corporate media. While many naive observers thought that the resignation of Rumsfeld marked the end for the Neocons, the fact is that the Neocons have recovered amazingly fast:

1) All remaining Presidential candidates with a chance to actually get into the White House are firmly under Neocon control.
2) The vast majority of the political advisers of these candidates (who will become future key members of the next Administration) are also Neocons.
3) The Pengaton has been effectively cleared from any Old Anglo Guard members capable of opposing Neocon plans for more wars in the Middle-East. Even better, it makes it easier for the Neocons to trigger a "Persian Gulf of Tonkin" kind of incident to trigger a war with Iran even before the Presidential election thereby probably propelling the most beloved candidates of the Neocons (McCain) to power.
4) The efforts of the Old Anglo Guard (Carter, Scheuer, Mearsheimer , Walt, Ritter, Odom, etc.) to make the power of the Israel Lobby a political issue have failed to penetrate the "sound barrier" (to use Amy Goodman's expression) of the corporate media which remains firmly pro-Neocon (not a single US new outlet has been willing to interview Sibel Edmons about her allegations that top US officials were selling nuclear secrets!).
5) All the major political scandals threatening to expose the Neocons (the AIPAC espionage trial, Sibel Edmon's revelations, "Scooter" Libby's case, Valerie Plame, the "lost nukes" headed for the Middle-East, the Federal Prosecutors scandal, etc.) have effectively been buried and send down the memory hole.Does that all mean that, as Justin Raimondo wrote, that "we are f*cked" and that the USA is headed for war? The short answer is "yes"........."

US Admiral Fallon, Last Leaf to Fall from Bush's Tree?

Al-Manar

".....Bush had dispatched Admiral Fallon to Lebanon last September on a mission "to unite security bodies in Lebanon exclusively under the command of the premiership (the unconstitutional government of Fouad Saniora). Fallon also discussed in Lebanon the building of a "US airbase" north of the country and called for changing the Lebanese armed forces' doctrine that regards Israel as an enemy. "

Qurai to Livni: Palestinian Authority "shocked" by decision to expand settlements. But Qurai is probably trying to sell the Israelis cement to build

"The head of the Palestinian negotiation team Ahmad Qurai sent a letter of dissatisfaction, Wednesday to Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni regarding Israels recent decision to approve settlement expansion near the city of Jerusalem......"

RACHEL CORRIE ~~ MURDERED BY THE STATE OF ISRAEL 5 YEARS AGO

Desert Peace

"In Memoriam
~ Rachel Corrie ~
1979 - 2003

May her memory be a Blessing to all that fight injustice anywhere in this world.
Below is footage from Rachel’s last interview conducted by Middle East Broadcasting Company on March 14th, 2003, two days before she was murdered by the Israeli Defense Forces...."

New UN Sanctions Make US-Iran War More Likely

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1803: Casus Belli

by William H. White
Global Research, March 12, 2008

"Passage of the third United Nations Security Council sanctions resolution against Iran makes a war between the United States and Iran more likely. The Bush administration has been pressing the United Nations Security Council for months to pass a third set of sanctions against Iran, which the council passed as resolution 1803 on March 3, 2008. As part of this effort, the United States delegation has shown uncharacteristic flexibility regarding various provisions of the draft resolution, as Secretary of State Rice and other administration officials have repeatedly called for swift passage of the resolution.

There is reason to suspect the Bush administration’s push for passage is actually focused on a single item: Provision (11), which calls upon member states to inspection of cargo bound to or from Iran. This is based on two fundamental assessments: 1) the Bush administrations has long planned to attack Iran; and, 2) the rationales for these attacks have shifted from nuclear weapons development to direct responsibility for US casualties in Iraq. And now it is likely a new shift in rationale is underway, claiming hostile actions against US vessels and using Provision (11) to create the pretext.

Provision (11) of Resolution 1803 (2008) reads as follows:

Calls upon all States, in accordance with their national legal authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, in particular the law of the sea and relevant international civil aviation agreements, to inspect the cargoes to and from Iran, of aircraft and vessels, at their airports and seaports, owned or operated by Iran Air Cargo and Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Line, provided there are reasonable grounds to believe that the aircraft or vessel is transporting goods prohibited under this resolution or resolution 1737 (2006) or resolution 1747 (2007);

It is likely that the Bush administration will now move swiftly, within the next few weeks, to use this authority to create a casus belli for attacking Iran....."

One State or Two? Neither.

The Issue is Zionism

Another Great Piece
By JONATHAN COOK
CounterPunch

"If the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the world’s most intractable, much the same can be said of the parallel debate about whether its resolution can best be achieved by a single state embracing the two peoples living there or by a division of the land into two separate states, one for Jews and the other for Palestinans.

The philosopher Michael Neumann has dedicated two articles, in 2007 and earlier this week, for CounterPunch discrediting the one-state idea as impractical and therefore as worthless of consideration. In response, Kathy Christison has mounted a robust defense, neatly exposing the twists and turns of Neumann’s logic. I will not trouble to cover the same ground.

I want instead to address Neumann’s central argument: that it is at least possible to imagine a consensus emerging behind two states, whereas Israelis will never accept a single state. That argument, the rallying cry of most two-staters, paints the one-state crowd as inveterate dreamers and time-wasters.

The idea, Neumann writes, “that Israel would concede a single state is laughable. … There is no chance at all [Israelis] will accept a single state that gives the Palestinians anything remotely like their rights.”

According to Neumann, unlike the one-state solution, the means to realizing two states are within our grasp: the removal of the half a million Jewish settlers living in the occupied Palestinian territories. Then, he writes, “a two-state solution will, indeed, leave Palestinians with a sovereign state, because that’s what a two-state solution means. It doesn’t mean one state and another non-state, and no Palestinian proponent of a two-state solution will settle for less than sovereignty.”

There is something surprisingly naive about his arguing that, just because something is called a two-state solution, it will necessarily result in two sovereign states. What are the mimimum requirements for a state to qualify as sovereign, and who decides? ........

The obstacle to a solution, then, is not about dividing the land but about Zionism itself, the ideology of ethnic supremacism that is the current orthodoxy in Israel. As long as Israel is a Zionist state, its leaders will allow neither one state nor two real states.

The solution, therefore, reduces to the question of how to defeat Zionism. It just so happens that the best way this can be achieved is by confronting the illusions of the two-state dreamers and explaining why Israel is in permanent bad faith about seeking peace.

In other words, if we stopped distracting ourselves with the Holy Grail of the two-state solution, we might channel our energies into something more useful: discrediting Israel as a Jewish state, and the ideology of Zionism that upholds it. Eventually the respectable façade of Zionism might crumble.

Without Zionism, the obstacle to creating either one or two states will finally be removed. And if that is the case, then why not also campaign for the solution that will best bring justice to both Israelis and Palestinians?"

Gaza Bleeding

Contributed by Fatima


Gaza Bleeding....

Archimandrite Hanna slams Israeli incitement against Palestinians, Arabs, in Jerusalem

"Archimandrite Atallah Hanna of the Greek Orthodox Church, stated on Tuesday that he is deeply concerned by racist statements voiced by Israeli officials against the Palestinians in Jerusalem and Arab residents of Israel. He said that these statements carry hatred and blind injustice against the Arabs and Palestinians who are the native inhabitants of the area.

Hanna added that incitement against Palestinians in Jerusalem, voiced recently by several Israeli leaders, raises concern that Israel might carry massive deportations which would target the Palestinians in Jerusalem in violation to the International law.

The statements of Hanna came during a meeting with Austrian human rights committees.

“There are several Israeli officials who are talking about displacing the Palestinians from Jerusalem, as if they are guests and are in Jerusalem due to 'Israeli hospitality'”, Atallah said, “Palestinians in Jerusalem are not guests, they have deep national, historical, religious and cultural roots in the land, but Israel is legalizing incitement against the Arabs and Palestinians, which is a very dangerous precedence”.

He also warned that the ongoing Israeli excavations in Jerusalem are threatening the historic holy sites, and the ancient buildings, and added that Arabs, Muslims and Christians, should counter these violations.

Hanna added that although there is a limited number of Palestinian Christians in the Holy Land, they remain part of the Palestinian people and cause, and that Jerusalem lives in the heart of every Palestinian Christian.

Furthermore, Hanna said that the city is an essential place for Muslims, and is a major part of their faith.

“Muslims and Christians in this land are brothers”, Hanna stated, “We are united by our Arab nationality, and by our Palestinian identity in this land”.

He called on International Human Rights organizations around the globe to help the Palestinian people in achieving independence, and liberation, and called for the right of return to all Palestinian refugees, in addition to releasing the political detainees from Israeli prisons. "

Is This Not Sweet? Israel and Abbas Both Boycotting Al-Jazeera! Al-Jazeera Must be Doing it Right!

Israeli Foreign Ministry to boycott Al Jazeera

"Foreign Ministry claims popular Arabic news network serves Hamas, intends to send letter to station's administration saying Israeli officials no longer to appear on programs. Israeli guest on Al Jazeera: Boycott not solution....."

Fatah and IOA unite against Al-Jazeera TV

"RAMALLAH, (PIC)-- Fatah faction and the Israeli occupation government have apparently united against the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera satellite TV as both parties started a campaign to boycott the Arab satellite TV channel for unveiling the truth about the Israeli massacres in the Gaza Strip......"

Israel boycotts Al-Jazeera in protest over its coverage of Israeli crimes

"OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, (PIC)-- Hebrew media outlets reported on Wednesday that the Israeli government decided to boycott the Qatar-based Al-Jazeera satellite channel over alleged "biased coverage" of the recent events in Gaza.

The Israeli foreign ministry stated that it would send a letter to Qatar in the coming days explaining the reasons for the boycott decision which includes a ban on Al-Jazeera correspondents from entering Israeli government offices or interviewing Israeli officials.

Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni ripped into Al-Jazeera, saying: "When depicting Israeli attacks, Al-Jazeera abuses the situation on the ground by telling lies. Unfortunately, during these attacks, civilians were killed. I am not trying to change facts. But, of course, when it comes to Al-Jazeera, everything is exaggerated."

In conjunction with this arbitrary campaign, PA leadership officials, who are at loggerheads with the Arab channel while maintaining strong relations with Israel, also called for boycotting Al-Jazeera because of its coverage of facts on the ground.

This PA-Israeli boycott campaign against Al-Jazeera came after the channel broadcast scenes of heinous massacres committed by IOF troops in Gaza 10 days ago which resulted in the death of more than 137 Palestinian victims and the injury of 370 others and before that its coverage of the repercussions of the Israeli siege on the Gaza people."

6 Signs the U.S. May Be Headed for War in Iran

".....1. Fallon's resignation: With the Army fully engaged in Iraq, much of the contingency planning for possible military action has fallen to the Navy, which has looked at the use of carrier-based warplanes and sea-launched missiles as the weapons to destroy Iran's air defenses and nuclear infrastructure. Centcom commands the U.S. naval forces in and near the Persian Gulf. In the aftermath of the problems with the Iraq war, there has been much discussion within the military that senior military officers should have resigned at the time when they disagreed with the White House.

2. Vice President Cheney's peace trip: Cheney, who is seen as a leading hawk on Iran, is going on what is described as a Mideast trip to try to give a boost to stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. But he has also scheduled two other stops: One, Oman, is a key military ally and logistics hub for military operations in the Persian Gulf. It also faces Iran across the narrow, vital Strait of Hormuz, the vulnerable oil transit chokepoint into and out of the Persian Gulf that Iran has threatened to blockade in the event of war. Cheney is also going to Saudi Arabia, whose support would be sought before any military action given its ability to increase oil supplies if Iran's oil is cut off. Back in March 2002, Cheney made a high-profile Mideast trip to Saudi Arabia and other nations that officials said at the time was about diplomacy toward Iraq and not war, which began a year later.

3. Israeli airstrike on Syria: Israel's airstrike deep in Syria last October was reported to have targeted a nuclear-related facility, but details have remained sketchy and some experts have been skeptical that Syria had a covert nuclear program. An alternative scenario floating in Israel and Lebanon is that the real purpose of the strike was to force Syria to switch on the targeting electronics for newly received Russian anti-aircraft defenses. The location of the strike is seen as on a likely flight path to Iran (also crossing the friendly Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq), and knowing the electronic signatures of the defensive systems is necessary to reduce the risks for warplanes heading to targets in Iran.

4. Warships off Lebanon: Two U.S. warships took up positions off Lebanon earlier this month, replacing the USS Cole. The deployment was said to signal U.S. concern over the political stalemate in Lebanon and the influence of Syria in that country. But the United States also would want its warships in the eastern Mediterranean in the event of military action against Iran to keep Iranian ally Syria in check and to help provide air cover to Israel against Iranian missile reprisals. One of the newly deployed ships, the USS Ross, is an Aegis guided missile destroyer, a top system for defense against air attacks.

5. Israeli comments: Israeli President Shimon Peres said earlier this month that Israel will not consider unilateral action to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. In the past, though, Israeli officials have quite consistently said they were prepared to act alone -- if that becomes necessary -- to ensure that Iran does not cross a nuclear weapons threshold. Was Peres speaking for himself, or has President Bush given the Israelis an assurance that they won't have to act alone?

6.Israel's war with Hezbollah: While this seems a bit old, Israel's July 2006 war in Lebanon against Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces was seen at the time as a step that Israel would want to take if it anticipated a clash with Iran. The radical Shiite group is seen not only as a threat on it own but also as a possible Iranian surrogate force in the event of war with Iran. So it was important for Israel to push Hezbollah forces back from their positions on Lebanon's border with Israel and to do enough damage to Hezbollah's Iranian-supplied arsenals to reduce its capabilities. Since then, Hezbollah has been able to rearm, though a United Nations force polices a border area buffer zone in southern Lebanon......."

'Fox' Fallon Fired

And we're f*cked…

By Justin Raimondo

".....Do I really need to draw you a picture to get you to imagine what's coming next? This is as clear a signal as any that the Bush administration intends to go out with a bang – one that will shake not only the Middle East but this country to its very foundations.......

..... Not that Fallon is all that surprised, I'll bet. Speaking freely to Barnett, he telegraphed his resignation:

"Sitting in his Tampa headquarters office last fall, I asked Fallon if he considered the Centcom assignment to be the same career-capping job that it'd been for his predecessors. He just laughed and said, 'Career capping? How about career detonating?'"

It's a detonation that will reverberate throughout the Middle East, prefiguring the mega-explosion to come. One can hardly imagine a clearer indication that the White House has made the decision to go to war with Iran . It's just a matter of when and how the administration can provoke an incident.

That's why U.S. warships are patrolling the Lebanese coast; and why our warships are playing hide-and-go-seek with Iranian gunboats in the Gulf. It's the reason the Israel lobby has been beating the tom-toms for war, and the reason the anti-Fallon, Petraeus, has been so vocal about the Iranian roots of our Iraqi problem. With Fallon out of the way, the road to war – a regional conflagration that will make the invasion of Iraq seem like a holiday picnic – is cleared. Get ready for World War III......"

To rescue the two-state solution, Israel must make peace with Syria

A Damascus detente could cut through the cloud of cynicism. But it all depends on a change at the White House

By Jonathan Freedland
The Guardian

"......Finally, there might be a way to rescue the two-state solution that does not involve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict so much as swerve around it. It's been tried at least three times before and come tantalisingly close. The plan: to make peace with Syria first.

The rewards for Israel would be obvious. Instantly, it would have what its founding prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, dreamed of: peace accords with all its immediate neighbours, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and therefore Lebanon. Moreover, the potential spoilers to any two-state solution - Hamas, Hizbullah and Syria itself - would no longer be a threat. "Syria is a lung through which Hizbullah breathes", says Palestinian negotiator and analyst Hussein Agha: if Syria reconciled with Israel, the organisation would have to end its confrontation with Israel. Hamas would be in the same position. Even Iran would have to alter its behaviour. The problem of the two-state notion was never its content, says Agha, only its context - and this would be the right context.

Suddenly Israel would feel much safer in coming to an accord with the Palestinians, even a united Palestinian entity that included Hamas. The two-state solution would look less like an impossible dream and more like an item of unfinished business.

Is it possible? Syria, conscious of the expectations of Arab solidarity, would be unlikely to make a separate deal with Israel at the apparent expense of the Palestinians: there would have to be some careful sequencing to show progress on both tracks. But the good news is that a rapprochement with Syria is discussed at the highest levels in Israel, even forming part of an intelligence briefing for the prime minister this very week. The bad news is that Israel insists it has not yet had sufficient evidence that Damascus is ready to do what it takes to make peace. It also has to be seriously doubted that Olmert is strong enough to play his part - and give up the Golan Heights conquered in 1967.

There is one last obstacle in the way of a Syrian-Israel peace. Those in the know say flatly that the Bush administration will not allow Jerusalem to talk to Damascus, which it deems an associate member of the "axis of evil". Put it down as one more reason why the world waits, ever more impatiently, for January 20 2009 - the day George W Bush will at last be gone. "

On McCain's Visit to Israel
McCain: To Be Elected in the US, I Have to be Voted For in Israel!

American Icarus flirted with fire

By Mark Perry
Asia Times

"......Well, actually, yes - and no. The decision to go to war will come down to one man, but his name won't be Fox Fallon, it will be George W Bush. More accurately, the constitution of the United States places foreign policy in the hands of the president as the commander-in-chief and the decision for declaring war is in the hands of the US Congress. Fallon's role in all of this, as I am sure he must know, is to obey orders and to keep his mouth shut, a point that was undoubtedly made plain to him by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in the immediate aftermath of the publication of this article. And, we might imagine, Gates put his objections to the article in the following terms: "Fox, just what in the hell do you think you were doing talking to Thomas Barrett?"

But this little exchange, between Barnett and Fallon in Cairo, is what put the admiral on the retirement list: "Fallon sidles up to me during a morning coffee break. 'I'm in hot water again,' he says." And Barnett asks him: "The White House?" And Fallon nods his head: "They say, why are you even meeting with [Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak." And Fallon goes on: "Why? Because it's my job to deal with this region, and it's all anyone wants to talk about right now. People here hear what I'm saying and understand. I don't want to get them too spun up. Washington interprets this as all aimed at them. Instead, it's aimed at government and media in this region. I'm not talking about the White House ... This is my center of gravity. This is my job." Not anymore. ......

There is a view abroad, commonly held, that Fallon has been sacrificed, has been gotten out of the way, by the Bush administration because he disagreed with its policies on Iran. That Fallon stood in the way of the neo-conservative cabal which is bent on expanding the Middle East conflict and that, when given the order for the attack (at some point in the future), Fallon would have courageously refused the order and reversed the tide of history.

What bunk.

Fallon was and is a navy officer and a patriot. As such, if given a legitimate order from the president of the United States, as passed through the legally constituted chain of command, he would have obeyed the order. Of this we can have absolutely no doubt. To do otherwise is treason and to believe otherwise is to believe that Fallon would have rejected every moment of training, every tradition of his service, every law and custom that has governed US civilian-military relations. The problem is not that Fallon disagreed with George Bush.

The problem is that he talked to Thomas Barnett. "

Fallon falls: Iran should worry

By Gareth Porter
Asia Times

"WASHINGTON - Admiral William Fallon's request to quit his position as head of the US Central Command (CENTCOM) and to retire from the military was apparently the result of a George W Bush administration decision to pressure him to resign.

Announcing the resignation, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he believed it was "the right thing to do", thus indicating the administration wanted it. Gates added that it would be "ridiculous" to suggest that Fallon's resignation signaled that the US planned to go to war with Iran......

Fallon's greatest concern appears to have been preventing war with Iran. He was one a group of senior military officers, apparently including most of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who were alarmed in late 2006 and early 2007 by indications that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were contemplating a possible attack on Iran.

Gates chose Fallon to replace General John P Abizaid as CENTCOM chief shortly after a December 13, 2006 meeting between Bush and the Joint Chiefs at which Bush reportedly asked their views on a possible strike against Iran.

Colonel W Patrick Lang, a former intelligence officer on the Middle East for the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Washington Post last week that Fallon had said privately at the time of his confirmation that an attack on Iran "isn't going to happen on my watch". When asked how he could avoid such a conflict, Fallon reportedly responded, "I have options, you know." Lang said he interpreted that comment as implying Fallon would step down rather than follow orders to carry out such an attack......"

موقف كويتي غريب

موقف كويتي غريب

عبد الباري عطوان

"....
القصة بدأت عندما وصف السيد علي الجاروش رئيس وفد الجامعة العربية في المؤتمر العراق بانه بلد محتل ، الامر الذي اثار غضب كل من نائب رئيس البرلمان العراقي الشيخ خالد العطية، والسيد جاسم الخرافي رئيس البرلمان الكويتي، فبادرا بالاعتراض علي هذا التوصيف بشكل عنيف صاخب، وطالبا مندوب الجامعة العربية بسحب اقواله والاعتذار علنا عنها.
الشيخ العطية اكد ان العراق ليس دولة محتلة، والا لما كان له ان يستضيف هذا المؤتمر بحرية ودون اي قيود . وشدد ان العراق دولة مستقلة تتمتع بالسيادة الكاملة، وان وجود قوات اجنبية خاضع لاتفاقية امنية . اما السيد الخرافي فقد تساءل عن الاعتبارات التي استند اليها مندوب الجامعة في موقفه، ونفي علمه بصدور قرار عن الجامعة يصف العراق بانه محتل .
نفهم ان يعترض الشيخ العطية علي مندوب الجامعة العربية وتوصيفه للوضع في العراق، ويدافع كما يشاء عن حكومته والعملية السياسية الامريكية التي افرزتها وكل المؤسسات الاخري المماثلة مثل البرلمان، ولكن ما لا نفهمه هو موقف السيد الخرافي، وهجومه الشرس علي مندوب الجامعة العربية، ومطالبته بالتراجع والاعتذار عن اقواله، والتعهد بعدم تكرارها في المستقبل.
ومثلما يتساءل السيد الخرافي عن المعايير والمرجعيات التي استند اليها في اطلاق وصف المحتل علي العراق، فاننا نسأله في المقابل عن المعايير التي استند اليها هو نفسه في نفي صفة الاحتلال عن العراق. فإذا كان وجود مئة وسبعين الف جندي امريكي، و25 الفا من القوات المتعددة الجنسيات لا يمثل احتلالا، فما هو الاحتلال اذن؟
....
....
لا يجادل احد في حق الكويتيين في كراهية النظام العراقي السابق، والرقص طربا لسقوطه ثأرا لاحتلاله لبلدهم، ولكن ما يمكن الجدل فيه هو امتداد هذا الحقد لمباركة اي خطوة امريكية، حتي لو جاءت غزوا واحتلالا لبلد عربي وتمزيق وحدته الترابية وقتل مليون من ابنائه وتشريد خمسة ملايين آخرين، وامتداح كل هذه المآسي والجرائم التي لحقت بالعراقيين والدفاع عنها بطريقة تفتقد الي ابسط قواعد العقل والمنطق.
السيد الجاروش مندوب الجامعة لم يخطئ، وكان يتحدث بلسان ثلاثمئة مليون عربي، واكثر من خمسة مليارات انسان في العالم، بمن فيهم الغالبية الساحقة من الامريكيين انفسهم، يعتبرون الوجود الامريكي في العراق احتلالا تسبب في تدمير هذا البلد وزعزعة استقرار العالم، وتوسيع دوائر العنف والارهاب فيه، وخلق ازمة اقتصادية عالمية، ورفع اسعار النفط الي اعلي معدلاتها علي الاطلاق (110 دولارات).
.....
....
فهل كان العاهل السعودي بعثيا او متعاطفا مع النظام السابق عندما فاجأ الجميع بهذا الموقف، وهل كان اسمه مدرجا علي قوائم الذين تعاملوا مع كوبونات النفط وأيدوا المقابر الجماعية؟
العراق محتل، والولايات المتحدة الامريكية نفسها ذهبت الي الامم المتحدة طالبة الاعتراف بها كقوة احتلال، لإضفاء صيغة قانونية علي وضعها بعد غزوها لأراضيه، وهذا مثبت وموثق في ادبيات المنظمة الدولية ويمكن الرجوع اليه في اي لحظة، ونحن لا نكشف سرا في هذا الصدد.
ولا نعرف اين هي هذه السيادة التي يتحدث عنها الشيخ العطية في العراق حيث تسيطر الميليشيات الطائفية علي مقدرات البلاد، ولم يبق من الحكومة غير اسم رئيسها، وتمارس الشركات الامنية الاجنبية دور الدولة داخل الدولة، ترتكب المجازر في حق العراقيين وتتصرف وكأنها فوق القانون مطمئنة الي قوانين امريكية توفر لها الحصانة المطلقة.
....
.....
الاحقاد علي النظام السابق من قبل البعض يجب ان لا تعميهم عن رؤية الحقيقة، والاعتراف بالخطأ، خاصة ان نتائج الاحتلال العراقي الكارثية باتت واضحة للجميع ولا تحتاج الي اثبات. العراق كله تحول الي مقبرة جماعية، وبات شعبه الكريم الأبي يتسول لقمة الخبز ويقف ساعات انتظارا لملء خزان سيارته بالبنزين وهو الذي يعوم علي احتياطي نفطي يزيد عن مئتي مليار برميل.
جميع الشعوب العربية النفطية تعيش حالة من الرخاء بسبب ارتفاع اسعار النفط باستثناء الشعب العراقي، من بقي منه في الوطن ومن غادر فاراً بحياته الي دول الجوار. قلة قليلة فقط من قادة الميليشيات واتباعهم ينعمون بالثروات النفطية في بلد اصبح يوصف بانه الاكثر فسادا في العالم.
لا نعتقد ان مندوب الجامعة العربية السيد الجاروش هو الذي يجب ان يعتذر ويسحب اقواله، وانما السيد الخرافي رئيس البرلمان الكويتي، اما الشيخ العطية فلا عتب عليه، فلولا الاحتلال وقواته لما تمكن من احتلال منصبه، وتمثيل بلد عريق مثل العراق."

Arab bloggers defy arrest

Abbas is one of a handful of Egyptian bloggers
documenting alleged human rights abuses

By Alexandra Sandels in Beirut
Al-Jazeera

"A number of Arab bloggers say they will continue to publish their messages online even as regional governments have started to aggressively restrict their activities.

Wael Abbas, an Egyptian online activist who uploaded YouTube video clips of two policemen torturing and sodomising a microbus driver in 2006, says the government is now pressuring bloggers in his country.

"The government is turning its eyes to us, forcing bloggers to shut down their blogs and harassing them," he told Al Jazeera.

The YouTube torture videos sparked public outrage and led to a landmark case in which the two policemen were sentenced to five years in prison.

But Abbas says he has come under increasing pressure since the case.

"They know what I am doing online. I have received several phone calls in the past year in which I have been told to stop cooperating with human rights organisations," he said......

Jail time is not the only challenge bloggers face. In some countries, even posting content can be a problem.

Syria, for example, is taking a two-pronged approach - first blocking sites like the popular web community tool Facebook, which was banned in November, and then arresting some of the online activists who find a way around the censorship......

Saudi blogger arrested

Bloggers in Saudi Arabia have also started to complain of government harassment.

In December, Fouad al-Farhan, popularly known as 'the dean' of the Saudi blogging community and a strong advocate of democratic reform, was arrested in Jeddah.

The Saudi government said al-Farhan was arrested for violating the kingdom's laws.....

Tunisia's cyber police

Meanwhile, Tunisian bloggers say they tread carefully to avoid the attention of what they call the country's "cyber police".

Mohamed Bouriga, a journalist currently living in Canada, says hackers routinely attack blogs and rewrite or delete content in the hopes of discouraging online dissent.

"I've had that happen to my blog. All internet connections are filtered by the Tunisian Internet Agency," he said......"

Fallon resigns as Mideast military chief. What Does This Imply?

"Adm. William Fallon, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, is resigning, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.

Gates said Fallon had asked him Tuesday morning for permission to retire and Gates agreed. Gates said the decision was entirely Fallon's and that Gates believed it was "the right thing to do."

Fallon was the subject of an article published last week in Esquire magazine that portrayed him as opposed to President Bush's Iran policy. It described Fallon as a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program.

Gates described as "ridiculous" any notion that Fallon's departure signals the United States is planning to go to war with Iran. And he said "there is a misperception" that Fallon disagrees with the administration's approach to Iran.

"I don't think there were differences at all," Gates added.

Fallon has had a 41-year Navy career. He took the Central Command post on March 16, 2007, succeeding Army Gen. John Abizaid, who retired. Fallon previously served as commander of U.S. Pacific Command......."

Top U.S. Commander in Middle East Resigns

"Admiral William Fallon, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, has resigned, citing a magazine article in which appeared to criticize President George W. Bush's policy toward Iran.

In a statement released by U.S. Central Command, Fallon cited the a recent Esquire magazine article which suggested differences between his views and Administration policies concerning Iran

"Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the President's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the CENTCOM region," Fallon said in a written statement released from his Tampa, Fla office.

"And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command Area of Responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there." Fallon's statement read.
"I have therefore concluded that it would be best to step aside and allow the Secretary and our military leaders to move beyond this distraction… and focus on the achievement of our strategic objectives in the region. I have submitted my request to retire to the Secretary of Defense."

Magazine: Fallon Standing Between Bush and Iran

In a recent interview with Esquire magazine, Fallon is described as being the only man standing between the Bush Administration and war with Iran.

"If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it'll all come down to one man. If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man. He is that rarest of creatures in the Bush universe: the good cop on Iran, and a man of strategic brilliance. His name is William Fallon," reads the magazine article......."

***

Combine this news item with Dick Cheney's visit next week to Israel, Turkey, Oman and Saudi Arabia, and the implications could be ominous. Don't panic yet, but it could be getting close.