LATEST UPDATES & LINKS TO STORIES ABOUT PALESTINE- Revolution(s) THE MIDEAST-WAR & FREEDOM.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Abuses inflame Palestinian rift
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/31/abuses-inflame-palestinian-rift/
Crackdowns in West Bank, Gaza entangle peace talks |
Yesha Council: We'll break construction freeze following attack
http://bit.ly/dlI7PH
The Yesha Council and heads of West Bank Jewish communities announced Tuesday that they will be breaking the settlement construction freeze as of 6pm on Wednesday, in response to the lethal shooting attack which killed four Israelis.
"The Zionist answer is to build and support. They shoot and we build. Each does as he believes," a Yesha Council statement noted. (Aviel Magnezi)
The Yesha Council and heads of West Bank Jewish communities announced Tuesday that they will be breaking the settlement construction freeze as of 6pm on Wednesday, in response to the lethal shooting attack which killed four Israelis.
"The Zionist answer is to build and support. They shoot and we build. Each does as he believes," a Yesha Council statement noted. (Aviel Magnezi)
Monday, August 30, 2010
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Rabbi Yosef: Abbas should perish from this world
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef wished death upon Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his people, and called them "enemies of Israel."
In his weekly class, Rabbi Yosef said "Abu Mazen and all these evil men – should perish from this world."
(Kobi Nahshoni)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3945076,00.html
In his weekly class, Rabbi Yosef said "Abu Mazen and all these evil men – should perish from this world."
(Kobi Nahshoni)
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3945076,00.html
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Fidel Castro: Osama bin Laden is a US agent
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3944798,00.html
Fidel Castro says al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is a bought-and-paid-for CIA agent who always popped up when former President George W. Bush needed to scare the world, arguing that documents recently posted on the Internet prove it.
"Any time Bush would stir up fear and make a big speech, bin Laden would appear threatening people with a story about what he was going to do," Castro told state media during a meeting with a Lithuanian-born writer known for advancing conspiracy theories about world domination. "Bush never lacked for bin Laden's support. He was a subordinate." (AP)
Fidel Castro says al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is a bought-and-paid-for CIA agent who always popped up when former President George W. Bush needed to scare the world, arguing that documents recently posted on the Internet prove it.
"Any time Bush would stir up fear and make a big speech, bin Laden would appear threatening people with a story about what he was going to do," Castro told state media during a meeting with a Lithuanian-born writer known for advancing conspiracy theories about world domination. "Bush never lacked for bin Laden's support. He was a subordinate." (AP)
Friday, August 27, 2010
Thursday, August 26, 2010
EMAIL : Response from Panorama #flotilla
Dear .....
Thank you for your email. May I start by saying that I'm obviously sorry you weren't happy with the programme. We stand by the film and defend its fairness, balance and methodology. Jane Corbin has been reporting from the region, including Gaza, for 25 years - most of that time for Panorama. One of her most recent films was a report on Israel's building programme in East Jerusalem - " A Walk in the Park", which is still on our website. Without her reputation for balance on the controversial areas she's covered, it's not likely she'd have been given access to the range of people she was: - from Israeli commandos involved in the raid; to the head of the IHH - Bulent Yildirim; to the Free Gaza Coordinator on board the Mavi Marmara - Lubna Masarwa; to three Turkish activists and others, including Ken O'Keefe, all who were on board the Mavi Marmara on the night in question. As you saw, she also spoke to Hamas official Dr Ahmed Yousef in Gaza.
I hope I can try and answer some of your questions.
I thought it might be useful to send you the response that I have written to a series of questions from the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign. These questions appear to broadly cover your email however do not hesitate to contact me if you wish to discuss any of this further.
1. Why was Israel’s ‘right’ to board the ship in international waters presumed throughout the programme?
I don't believe the programme made any such assumption. The programme set out to try and explain what happened on the MM, not to pass judgement on the morality of the actions of either the IDF or the IHH activists. We made it clear that the MM was in international waters and that Turkey and others have accused Israel of committing an act of piracy. Indeed Jeremy Vine stated clearly in his introduction "Israel has been accused of breaking international law". There are two inquiries under way which are looking specifically at the contested legality of the IDF's actions.
2. Why did the programme completely fail to mention that Israel’s siege of Gaza has been declared illegal by the UN?
The assumption was made that Israel has the right to blockade Gaza, while the motives of those attempting to break an illegal blockade were questioned.
The programme's objective was to set out what happened on the MM. We made it clear both in commentary and interview that the flotilla's aim was to break the Gaza blockade. We visited Gaza, explained (albeit briefly) the situation there and heard from people like Ken O'Keefe and others about their motivation to break the blockade. Panorama has made a number of highly praised and hard-hitting award winning films about the situation in Gaza and will continue to make films about the Middle east.
3. Why was Israeli evidence of how and when they killed the activists remained unquestioned. Activists who were on the top deck of the ship say the first person was killed – shot from a helicopter – before any Israeli had even landed on the deck. However, none of these activists who made these reports were interviewed.
In the course of our research we spoke to many people who were on the boat. In particular we worked closely with the IHH in Turkey who helped find us 3 activists who were involved in the night, all of whom spoke at length about the events on the boat. We also spoke at great length to the head of the IHH who had been on the top deck and was aware of all the allegations. In total we spoke to 6 people who had been travelling with the MM.
4. Activists shot footage of the Israeli attack, but their cameras, laptops and other recording equipment were taken by the Israelis and not returned. Why was this point not raised during the programme, or put to the Israeli spokespeople?
We clearly stated that we were using pictures "seized by the Israelis". In addition the head of the IHH, Bulent Yildirim stated that the "Israelis had stole these pictures". All featured footage was meticulously double and cross checked to verify its accuracy, any footage of uncertain events during the raid were clearly labelled as such.
5.Why were the way in which the 9 died not discussed in more details?
We made it absolutely clear that nine people had been shot dead by the Israelis and many injured. We saw and heard from a Turkish activist shot by the Israelis who described the scene. We showed footage of the Israeli assault, including pictures of soldiers firing their pistols on the protestors and Bulent Yildirim's contemporaneous commentary that they were being fired upon. We also spoke to one of those shot who could describe in detail the scene. The issue of who shot those onboard and how they died was not in doubt. Jane Corbin: But people were being killed and the dead and wounded were carried down below. Amongst the casualties was Fatih – hit in the chest by paintball pellets, in the arm by a live round.
Fathi Kovakdan: "After I was shot my friends took me inside to the first floor. Everyone was panicking and shouting for the doctor because 50 people were badly wounded …. .// I saw friends covered in blood…. "
In addition Jane Corbin put it to Giora Eiland that "They have a point don’t they – many people see it as once more Israel using excessive and disproportionate force."
6. Why was there no footage of the Israeli assaults on the activist – which led to nine deaths?
We used footage from many different sources, including Israeli footage. For example we showed video of the Israelis on the ship and firing their pistols. We showed video of the wounded and dead from the ship.
7. Jane Corbin never questions the use of the word "terrorist" to describe the activists. Why does she then fail to examine why there were no fatalities or serious injuries among the Israeli commandoes, when these so-called ‘terrorists’ were so willing to attack?
At no point did Jane Corbin use the word "terrorist" to describe the activists. She said:
"The IHH isn’t just known for their humanitarian work. Western authorities have accused them of having links to terrorist organizations. They strongly deny this". This is a relevant statement of fact . We noted that Israel has been accused of an act of piracy.
8. Why were there no interviews with any of the British activists on board the ship, or with any of the journalists who were on board?
In the course of our research we spoke to many people involved. We decided to interview 6 people who were on board the MM, all of whom could reveal crucial details about the incident, from the head of the IHH Bulent Yildirim, to the FGM media co-ordinator Lubna Marsawa, these were journalistic decisions, not based on nationality. We also spoke to Ken O'Keefe, who’s based in London. Each of the 6 people we interviewed were well positioned on the MM to be able to explain what happened.
9.The IDF has already admitted doctoring the audio footage used in the programme, that the BBC claims was broadcast from the captain’s deck?
This accusation is incorrect. You refer to the use of the audio tapes in which someone is recorded saying "Go back to Auschwitz". The IDF has not "admitted doctoring" this tape. In fact the IDF has said that it is unsure which of the flotilla's ships sent this message and that the first version of the tape released on to Youtube had had the silences taken out. The IDF later released the full unedited version of the tape. Nonetheless, we accept that there is controversy surrounding these tapes and therefore we clearly pointed this out:
"The recording’s authenticity has provoked controversy. The flotilla’s organisers insist they did not hear these comments being made".
Further we did not say that the audio came from the captain’s deck, in fact we said: The Israelis released what they said was the radio response from the flotilla. Part of it was defiant and abusive.
I do hope that I have gone some way to answering your questions.
I thought it might be useful to send you the response that I have written to a series of questions from the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign. These questions appear to broadly cover your email however do not hesitate to contact me if you wish to discuss any of this further.
1. Why was Israel’s ‘right’ to board the ship in international waters presumed throughout the programme?
I don't believe the programme made any such assumption. The programme set out to try and explain what happened on the MM, not to pass judgement on the morality of the actions of either the IDF or the IHH activists. We made it clear that the MM was in international waters and that Turkey and others have accused Israel of committing an act of piracy. Indeed Jeremy Vine stated clearly in his introduction "Israel has been accused of breaking international law". There are two inquiries under way which are looking specifically at the contested legality of the IDF's actions.
2. Why did the programme completely fail to mention that Israel’s siege of Gaza has been declared illegal by the UN?
The assumption was made that Israel has the right to blockade Gaza, while the motives of those attempting to break an illegal blockade were questioned.
The programme's objective was to set out what happened on the MM. We made it clear both in commentary and interview that the flotilla's aim was to break the Gaza blockade. We visited Gaza, explained (albeit briefly) the situation there and heard from people like Ken O'Keefe and others about their motivation to break the blockade. Panorama has made a number of highly praised and hard-hitting award winning films about the situation in Gaza and will continue to make films about the Middle east.
3. Why was Israeli evidence of how and when they killed the activists remained unquestioned. Activists who were on the top deck of the ship say the first person was killed – shot from a helicopter – before any Israeli had even landed on the deck. However, none of these activists who made these reports were interviewed.
In the course of our research we spoke to many people who were on the boat. In particular we worked closely with the IHH in Turkey who helped find us 3 activists who were involved in the night, all of whom spoke at length about the events on the boat. We also spoke at great length to the head of the IHH who had been on the top deck and was aware of all the allegations. In total we spoke to 6 people who had been travelling with the MM.
4. Activists shot footage of the Israeli attack, but their cameras, laptops and other recording equipment were taken by the Israelis and not returned. Why was this point not raised during the programme, or put to the Israeli spokespeople?
We clearly stated that we were using pictures "seized by the Israelis". In addition the head of the IHH, Bulent Yildirim stated that the "Israelis had stole these pictures". All featured footage was meticulously double and cross checked to verify its accuracy, any footage of uncertain events during the raid were clearly labelled as such.
5.Why were the way in which the 9 died not discussed in more details?
We made it absolutely clear that nine people had been shot dead by the Israelis and many injured. We saw and heard from a Turkish activist shot by the Israelis who described the scene. We showed footage of the Israeli assault, including pictures of soldiers firing their pistols on the protestors and Bulent Yildirim's contemporaneous commentary that they were being fired upon. We also spoke to one of those shot who could describe in detail the scene. The issue of who shot those onboard and how they died was not in doubt. Jane Corbin: But people were being killed and the dead and wounded were carried down below. Amongst the casualties was Fatih – hit in the chest by paintball pellets, in the arm by a live round.
Fathi Kovakdan: "After I was shot my friends took me inside to the first floor. Everyone was panicking and shouting for the doctor because 50 people were badly wounded …. .// I saw friends covered in blood…. "
In addition Jane Corbin put it to Giora Eiland that "They have a point don’t they – many people see it as once more Israel using excessive and disproportionate force."
6. Why was there no footage of the Israeli assaults on the activist – which led to nine deaths?
We used footage from many different sources, including Israeli footage. For example we showed video of the Israelis on the ship and firing their pistols. We showed video of the wounded and dead from the ship.
7. Jane Corbin never questions the use of the word "terrorist" to describe the activists. Why does she then fail to examine why there were no fatalities or serious injuries among the Israeli commandoes, when these so-called ‘terrorists’ were so willing to attack?
At no point did Jane Corbin use the word "terrorist" to describe the activists. She said:
"The IHH isn’t just known for their humanitarian work. Western authorities have accused them of having links to terrorist organizations. They strongly deny this". This is a relevant statement of fact . We noted that Israel has been accused of an act of piracy.
8. Why were there no interviews with any of the British activists on board the ship, or with any of the journalists who were on board?
In the course of our research we spoke to many people involved. We decided to interview 6 people who were on board the MM, all of whom could reveal crucial details about the incident, from the head of the IHH Bulent Yildirim, to the FGM media co-ordinator Lubna Marsawa, these were journalistic decisions, not based on nationality. We also spoke to Ken O'Keefe, who’s based in London. Each of the 6 people we interviewed were well positioned on the MM to be able to explain what happened.
9.The IDF has already admitted doctoring the audio footage used in the programme, that the BBC claims was broadcast from the captain’s deck?
This accusation is incorrect. You refer to the use of the audio tapes in which someone is recorded saying "Go back to Auschwitz". The IDF has not "admitted doctoring" this tape. In fact the IDF has said that it is unsure which of the flotilla's ships sent this message and that the first version of the tape released on to Youtube had had the silences taken out. The IDF later released the full unedited version of the tape. Nonetheless, we accept that there is controversy surrounding these tapes and therefore we clearly pointed this out:
"The recording’s authenticity has provoked controversy. The flotilla’s organisers insist they did not hear these comments being made".
Further we did not say that the audio came from the captain’s deck, in fact we said: The Israelis released what they said was the radio response from the flotilla. Part of it was defiant and abusive.
I do hope that I have gone some way to answering your questions.
Best
Daniel
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Iran Guards chief secretly oversees war plans - in Damascus
http://www.debka.com/article/8988/?utm_source=DEBKAFile&utm_medium=DEBKAFile
Iranian Revolutionary Guards chief Gen. Mohamed Ali Jafari, who rarely leaves his country, paid a secret visit to Damascus a few hours before Tehran launched its first nuclear reactor at Bushehr Saturday, Aug. 21. With him were top Al Qods Brigades commanders in Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian territories. The group stayed only long enough to confer with Syrian president Bashar Assad and his military and intelligence chiefs on three topics:
1. The roles Syria and Hizballah will play in a potential Iranian military reprisal to a possible American or Israeli strike on its nuclear sites.
2. The probable repercussions of an Iranian decision to use Hizballah or pro-Iranian terrorists as proxies for a pre-emptive strike - or strikes - against Israel.
3. How Syria can help discourage the Persian Gulf and Saudi Arabia from their willingness to support a US or Israel attack on Iran with bases, intelligence assets and other means.
The importance and urgency of this discussion is attested to by the IRGC's supreme commander having made his trip outside Iran for many years. It was one of the red lights abounding of late that instilled in Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak a sense of urgency for a strategic response to the Bushehr startup. He accordingly cut short the furious contest raging in the IDF's General Staff over the contest for the next chief of staff by an abrupt announcement of Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant's appointment to the post when the incumbent ends his tour of duty in February. This quelled the scandals surrounding forged documents and intrigue, but above all it sent a message to Tehran: Israel's defensive posture and self-restraint, as practiced by Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi, was about to change. Iran may run into a different response if it makes goods on its threats of aggression and the flurry of war preparations they are orchestrating around Israel's borders.
The incoming IDF Chief of Staff Gen. Galant, who commanded the 2009 Cast lead operation against Hamas in Gaza, subscribes to an offensive, proactive military approach in contrast to the dovish Ashkenazi. Although he formally takes the reins next February, Ashkenazi may well will step down before his term is up and make way for his hawkish successor. With Galant at his side, the defense minister has begun reshaping the General Staff to match the new approach and the requirements of the incoming C-of-S.
debkafile's military sources add that Israel is taking very seriously the presence in Gen. Jafari's secret delegation to Damascus of two high-ranking IRGC Al Qods officers. They have been identified as Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, commander of Iran's terrorist and spy networks in Iraq, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Hassan Mahdavi, formally designated IRGC envoy to the Lebanese Hizballah, who was recently elevated to overall command of the Lebanese terrorist organization.
This promotion effectively changes the status of Hizballah, which is represented as a political force in Lebanon's parliament and government, from Tehran's surrogate to external arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps under the direct command of an al Qods officer - an ominous pointer to the goals Iran has set itself in a country bordering on northern Israel.
As for Al Muhandis, the US Treasury targeted him for personal sanctions in July 2009 as "adviser to Qasem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Qod's Force, the arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps responsible for providing material support to Lebanon-based Hizballah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command" - all of them notorious terrorist groups.
Iranian Revolutionary Guards chief Gen. Mohamed Ali Jafari, who rarely leaves his country, paid a secret visit to Damascus a few hours before Tehran launched its first nuclear reactor at Bushehr Saturday, Aug. 21. With him were top Al Qods Brigades commanders in Lebanon, Iraq and the Palestinian territories. The group stayed only long enough to confer with Syrian president Bashar Assad and his military and intelligence chiefs on three topics:
1. The roles Syria and Hizballah will play in a potential Iranian military reprisal to a possible American or Israeli strike on its nuclear sites.
2. The probable repercussions of an Iranian decision to use Hizballah or pro-Iranian terrorists as proxies for a pre-emptive strike - or strikes - against Israel.
3. How Syria can help discourage the Persian Gulf and Saudi Arabia from their willingness to support a US or Israel attack on Iran with bases, intelligence assets and other means.
The importance and urgency of this discussion is attested to by the IRGC's supreme commander having made his trip outside Iran for many years. It was one of the red lights abounding of late that instilled in Israeli defense minister Ehud Barak a sense of urgency for a strategic response to the Bushehr startup. He accordingly cut short the furious contest raging in the IDF's General Staff over the contest for the next chief of staff by an abrupt announcement of Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant's appointment to the post when the incumbent ends his tour of duty in February. This quelled the scandals surrounding forged documents and intrigue, but above all it sent a message to Tehran: Israel's defensive posture and self-restraint, as practiced by Lt. Gen. Gaby Ashkenazi, was about to change. Iran may run into a different response if it makes goods on its threats of aggression and the flurry of war preparations they are orchestrating around Israel's borders.
The incoming IDF Chief of Staff Gen. Galant, who commanded the 2009 Cast lead operation against Hamas in Gaza, subscribes to an offensive, proactive military approach in contrast to the dovish Ashkenazi. Although he formally takes the reins next February, Ashkenazi may well will step down before his term is up and make way for his hawkish successor. With Galant at his side, the defense minister has begun reshaping the General Staff to match the new approach and the requirements of the incoming C-of-S.
debkafile's military sources add that Israel is taking very seriously the presence in Gen. Jafari's secret delegation to Damascus of two high-ranking IRGC Al Qods officers. They have been identified as Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis, commander of Iran's terrorist and spy networks in Iraq, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and Hassan Mahdavi, formally designated IRGC envoy to the Lebanese Hizballah, who was recently elevated to overall command of the Lebanese terrorist organization.
This promotion effectively changes the status of Hizballah, which is represented as a political force in Lebanon's parliament and government, from Tehran's surrogate to external arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps under the direct command of an al Qods officer - an ominous pointer to the goals Iran has set itself in a country bordering on northern Israel.
As for Al Muhandis, the US Treasury targeted him for personal sanctions in July 2009 as "adviser to Qasem Soleimani, the commander of Iran's Qod's Force, the arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps responsible for providing material support to Lebanon-based Hizballah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command" - all of them notorious terrorist groups.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)