The Annopolis Summit - what is it all about?

Let's put aside this upcoming conference and see the Bush record in it's totality. Look at all the areas where Bush intervened - in Georgia, Ukraine and Lebanon? All these places have gridlock and are in serious political crises. The opposition forces are working at reversing the course by pushing out the "pro-Western" puppet regimes the Bush administration put in power. This trend has reached Gaza. The WB appears to be Bush's last stand - his Waterloo. So this conference is more about Bush than about solving the P/I conflict. I have no doubt Bush would love nothing better than to end his reign with some kind of "peace deal" that he knows his legacy desperately needs but he also knows he lacks the political capital to bring it about. All in all, this is a sad pathetic desperation play. At the height of his political prowess, he opted to follow the mad policy of the neo-cons - which basically says "let them fight it out" and "don't restrain Israel". Six years later and after the fighting, it's Hamas that is standing tall and Olmert and Israel looking weak( when you add the Gaza withdrawal and Lebanon fiasco).

So now these weak leaders are prepared to lick their wounds - when they failed to defeat the "hardliners" on the battlefield - they are attempting to defeat them in the political arena. They call for a conference - a way to present the "winners" on the battlefield as "losers" by isolating them - by not inviting them - and by lining up the "pro-western moderates" - like the good puppets they are - standing behind ole glory - and let me guess what Bush and company will be mostly talking about? Well, I will bet the farm, rather than Bush uttering anything meaningful on the P/I conflict, it will be a speech about his side being the peace loving, democracy seeking and human right abiding side, defeating the "terrorists" and dark vision promoting hate filled fanatics on the other side who are marching to Iranian orders ( gotta love the irony of an Empire pointing fingers at other states for exercising their influence for their self-interest). And of course, this show of force by the "moderates" - those invited by Bush and those following the script - represent a clear victory for the good guys.

All good and dandy but what about ending the 40 year Israeli occupation and creating a Palestinian state - well, "the parties themselves will have to negotiate" - so why come to America when the parties themselves are only 15 minute ride apart from Ramallah to Tel-Aviv?

Ahh, this is the kicker, once again, it's all show - not easy when you can't show a single success story on your record - but hey- we got a conference held in Annapolis?

Wonderful, but here is the reality, absent of real serious hammer like pressure on Israel, nothing will move. Bush has yet to show he has the balls or the inclination to go down that route. Former SOS Baker exhibited the kind of toughness that was needed ( although AIPAC and Likud and company won that battle in the end) - telling Shamir and his regime if they were interested in peace to call him but Condi can't play that role for the simple fact she has slept in the devils den for too long and ate of it's bitter fruits - and that includes Bush.

So what now, time to accept the fact, the "hardliners" won. The so called "doves" , "moderates", "pro-western" or even something more laughable, the "Israeli peace camp", such distortion of reality can only go so far before reality imposes it's will.

Defeating the "hardliners", the "anti-peace", "anti-negotiation" , "anti-compromise" , "anti-returning land or anti-ending occupation crowd", "anti-two state solution" crowd is a necessary first step but everything Israel and America have done worked the opposite of that direction even though that was their intended aim( we are told). The methods Israel and America used, starvation, sanctions, isolation, arming the "good guys" and everything in between only insured a defeat for the so called "moderates".

Having said all of that, if anyone thinks the only worry on the Israeli side are the blatant rejectionist party of Lieberman and Likud - they are simply ill informed of Israeli politics. Does anyone really believe Barak wants Olmert to succeed in delivering a peace deal?

Who is kidding who here, Barak is eying the PM seat and he will be the biggest saboteur in this process. He has been already working to sabotage everything from day one. His refusal to ease conditions while Olmert makes promises to Abbas and Rice such actions will be taken are all politically motivated to insure failure.

The truth be told, despite what you keep reading about how polls show the majority of Palestinian and Israeli's want peace and are willing for compromise - both sides remain far apart on core issues. One can easily argue they are irreconcilable issues - and I'm one to argue that - but beyond that - Israel has never accepted or come to grips with its limited options on many questions. To this day, Israeli leaders continue to believe force alone can delay the inevitable.

To highlight the deluded mind set of the Israeli state, just look at the debate over recognizing "Israel as a Jewish state". Why should we care if Israel is a "Jewish state" or Chinese state, get out of our lands, end the occupation, treat our Palestinian brothers in Israel fairly and equally under the law - prosper and be happy. But there is something terribly neurotic about all this silly debate. It highlights a pathology that seems hell bent on self-destruction.

The Power of Nightmares

A must see documentary that explains in detail the deception regarding "the war on terror". I found it very provocative and educational. It's no surprise such an eye-opening program will not be seen on any American media. This documentary is not about any so called "conspiracy theory" but an actual history lesson on Islamic extremism and neo-conservatism. The parallel paths both movements take is fascinating to observe and this documentary is great putting it all in it's proper historical context.

American and Israeli plans will fail

Why Oblivion Looms for Abbas

Guest Column: Mark Perry offers 10 reasons why Hamas, rather than Abu Mazen and his U.S. backers will prevail in the struggle for Palestinian hearts and minds. The Islamists today represent the Palestinian mainstream, while Fatah is broken from top to bottom. Even more importantly, Abbas is increasingly isolated within his own organization, most of whose grassroots and mid-level leadership want nothing to do with the U.S. schemes on which Abbas has staked his future. By Halloween, expect Abbas to be either back in a unity government with Hamas, or else having departed the scene

By Mark Perry

In the summer of 1997 I found myself seated in the office of Yasser Arafat in Gaza. I had known Arafat for many years, and was a welcome visitor. Being an American and a friend gave me privileges. Others weighed their words, but I was constrained by no such requirement. So as he thumbed through a stack of papers, I pleaded clemency for a friend who had been under house arrest in Gaza for the better part of a year. The man, a prominent security official, had ordered Palestinian security forces to fire on a Hamas demonstration the summer before and Arafat, enraged, had ordered him home. “He made a mistake,” I said. “It’s time to bring him back.” Arafat ignored me.

There was a long moment of silence as Arafat’s aides eyed each other in discomfort. Arafat motioned to one of them and handed him a paper. This was typical of him. You could spend hours with the man in silence. He continued to pretend he hadn’t heard, so I plunged on. “The man is dedicated,” I said. Arafat stopped, his eyes widening, but he still refused to look at me. I waited many moments and pleaded my case again. “He’s a good man.” Finally, he spoke, but he bit off each word, making his point. “This is not your concern.” And he was silent again. “I think that it is,” I said. “He is a friend of mine.” Arafat was suddenly exasperated and locked me in his gaze, to emphasize his point: “He crossed a line.”

Those of us who know and understand something of Palestinian society were saddened by June’s Gaza troubles — the flickering YouTube films of Palestinian gunmen being dragged willy-nilly through the streets of the Strip seemed a talisman of lines crossed so many times they no longer existed. Palestinians have fought each other before — most notably in the Palestinian Civil War that raged in northern Lebanon in 1983 — but nothing like this. Palestinians themselves seemed to draw back, even recoil, from the violence. “Both sides made mistakes,” Hamas official Usamah Hamdan told me in Beirut in late June and there was sadness in his voice. “We are sorry for that.”

In the wake of these troubles, Palestinian President Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) cut ties with Hamas, declared an emergency government, suspended the workings of the Palestinian Legislative Council, arrested dozens of Hamas legislative members, clamped down on anti-government protests, purged critics in his own Fatah movement, and announced he would begin immediate talks with the Olmert government. The U.S reciprocated: it urged Israel to release hundreds of millions of dollars in tax monies, said it would work towards the creation of a Palestinian state, pressured Israel to ease travel restrictions in the West Bank, awarded the Abu Mazen government tens of millions of dollars in economic and security aid, urged Arab nations to support Abu Mazen’s political program, called on the EU to take similar actions, dispatched a team of experts to assess Palestinian needs, called for an international conference to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and conducted high-level talks with Arab nations to make certain their support for these programs was assured. The actions were breathtaking in their scope. They provided, for the first time in nearly a decade, the prospect for a political resolution of the daunting Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

And they have absolutely no prospect of success.

Instead, Abu Mazen will fail to solidify his position as President of the Palestinian Authority; the American program to support him will fail; there will be no international conference; and, within the next sixty to ninety days — and almost certainly by the end of the year — Abu Mazen and his colleagues will either be forced into exile or will take steps to reconstitute the national unity government that they have spent the last 60 days destroying.

And here’s why:
# 1. Palestinian society is not divided

Palestinian society is more united than it has been in years, in spite of what we see on our televisions or read in the American press. The “Gaza coup” was not launched in Gaza, but in Ramallah — and the forces that brought instability to the Strip were funded and armed by the United States. They did not represent Fatah or even a majority in Fatah, but rather a small minority of Fatah radicals. The vast majority of mainline forces in Fatah, and even a significant number in the Fatah Central Committee did not support the arming of the Preventive Security Services. The leader of the PSS, Mohammad Dahlan is now in exile and his opponents are calling for his arrest. The Palestinian people know this. They know their vote was overturned by Abu Mazen and the United States, and they resent it.
# 2. Hamas remains popular, and it is gaining strength

It is true, there have been some dips in the popularity of the movement in some areas, but the losses are not significant. And, remember, there is a tendency in the U.S. to consistently underestimate Hamas’s popularity, which I attribute to:

– a disbelief that Palestinians could support such an organization

– a belief in U.S.-funded Palestinian polling numbers

– the reputed secular nature of Palestinian society

– a tendency to overlook the traditional strength of Hamas during periods of confrontation, and

– the impact of the economic embargo.

My own (admittedly unscientific), belief is that Hamas’s strength is likely to grow. The movement’s base of support has widened significantly — from about 9 percent in the late 1980s to about 25 to 30 percent now, numbers that match up well to any well-established Western political party. While its parliamentary victory in January of 2006 was due largely to Fatah’s poor reputation, Hamas has not repeated Fatah’s mistakes: despite the clear temptations of power, it has provided as good a government as its resources have allowed — no stain of impropriety has touched its senior leadership. This remains its most significant achievement.
# 3. Hamas represents mainstream Palestinian society

Palestinian society is not secular, liberal, progressive and western. It is Arab, traditional, conservative and Muslim. Mahmoud Abbas, Salam Fayad, Saeb Erakat and Yasser Abed Rabbo are fine people — and they are friends of mine — but they do not represent mainstream Palestinian society. Hamas does. The election of Hamas and its continued strength is not a setback for Palestinian society, but a reflection of its growth. My own Hamiltonian tendencies are humbled. It is possible to understand America by visiting Boston, but I wouldn’t recommend it — any more than I would recommend that an American believe that Hanan Ashrawi is typically Palestinian. Americans aren’t governed from Nantucket but from Natchez, and Palestinians aren’t governed from Ramallah, but from Jubalya — and wishing it so doesn’t make it so. That Fatah was defeated is not simply a comment on their corruption, but on their inability to speak for the people of Palestine. It is for this that Hamas is likely to grow and prosper.
# 4. Hamas is is not innately or irrevocably wedded to violence

Hamas stood for an election and won. We decided to reverse the verdict of a democratic process, not them. There is certainly debate inside of Hamas on the efficacy of continuing the movement’s involvement in electoral politics. The loss of some popular support, the reversion to violence in Gaza, the inability of the movement to break the international boycott, emerging divisions inside Hamas itself, and the closing off of political options have sparked this internal debate. But I doubt that Hamas will abandon its current strategy in favor of violent confrontation, either with Fatah or with Israel. The view from Gaza may seem dark, perhaps the view is even darker in Damascus. But there is another side to the ledger, and it is as significant: Balancing Hamas’s strengths are Fatah’s continuing weaknesses — and those cannot be reversed with a simple infusion of our money.
# 5. From top to bottom, Fatah is broken

Fatah is weak, aging, corrupt, disorganized, and even more divided than Hamas; it is funded exclusively through outside sources; it lacks a clear political program and political vision; its leadership is out-of-touch, conference-bound, tethered to a past era; it is dependent for its survival on the United States and Israel (a fact of which Palestinian society is well aware, at the expense of Fatah’s credibility) it is at war with its own younger cadre (which are abandoning the movement). Its militant Tanzim grassroots are growing in strength, but are alienated from Fatah’s leadership, disenchanted with its corruption and, perhaps most importantly, is cooperating with Hamas. The Fatah grassroots is pushing hard, just now, for the long-delayed General Conference to reform the organization. Abu Mazen can throw Hamas legislators in jail — it will be much more difficult to throw members of his own party in jail, which is why …
# The political battle being waged in the West Bank now is being waged inside of Fatah

Abu Mazen’s power has been significantly eroded inside of his own organization. The recent meeting of the committee called to make an assessment of the Gaza troubles repudiated Abu Mazen’s appointees: Mohammad Dahlan, Rashid Abu Shabak and Tawfik Tarawi. Abu Mazen is within one vote of losing his Fatah power base. His closest aides (Salam Fayad, Saeb Erakat, Rafiq Husseini, Yasser Abed Rabbo) count for nothing in Fatah, because they have no vote in the organization. Abu Mazen’s plea to the Central Committee last Tuesday, that “my aides have told me my actions are legal,” brought laughter even from his closest supporters. Former Prime Minister Abu Alaa has refused to support him and Hani al-Hassan has denounced him. In response someone shot up Hassan’s house. He laughs: “They made sure I wasn’t here,” he told me. And the former national security advisor, Jabril Rajoub has called for Mohammad Dahlan’s arrest. Abu Mazen’s response has been to say he will hold national elections — but without allowing Hamas to run. And our president has conferred his blessing on this, calling Abu Mazen’s government “legitimate.” Truly, truly, truly, we are a light in the darkness, a city on a hill.
# 7. Abu Mazen is increasingly isolated

The non-payment of governmental salaries to Hamas members in the West Bank is causing deep disenchantment because it cuts across family and tribal lines. So it is that one brother, a Fatah member, is paid while another (a Hamas member) is not. Salam Fayad has thereby proven to be a good bean counter, but not much of a politician. He has set family against family, brother against brother. And doing that is deeply resented in the West Bank. So too, the security services are in a posture of near-revolt over the policy of continuing arrests of anti-Abu Mazen partisans. Posters have begun to appear in the West Bank, styling Abu Mazen a Palestinian Pinochet — or worse, an “Abu Musa” (the man whom Syrian President Hafez Assad sent to kill Arafat in Lebanon). The posters are being designed by Fatah, not Hamas. Do we really believe that the Palestinian police will continue to follow Abbas’s orders: to arrest Hamas activists because they do not meet the conditions of the Quartet? Because Hamas does not “recognize Israel?”

# 8. The united front of the U.S.-Israel and the Arab regimes is no match for Hamas in the battle for Palestinian support

Indeed, the much-vaunted united front being built by the U.S. against Hamas is something of a myth: The Egyptians and Saudis have quietly repudiated the U.S. program to overthrow Hamas, and instead have urged Fatah and Hamas to reconcile. Colin Powell has called for talks with the Hamas leadership, while Israel’s support for Abu Mazen remains predictably indifferent. (They’re no dummies – the Israelis, too, will end up talking to Hamas is my bet.) There are 542 roadblocks in the West Bank — the same number will be there tomorrow and next week and next month. Tell me I’m wrong. Israel has returned tax money collected for the Palestinians to the Palestinians, but not all of it — and it has trickled in. Do we really, really believe that Israel will suddenly rise up as one and say that they intend to endorse UN Resolutions 242 and 338? Or are they now quietly laughing into their tea and shaking their heads: we’re going to support Abu Mazen? We’re going to send him guns? We’re going to conduct talks with him and calculate that he will be able to produce competent and uncorrupt administration — and one that has the support of his people? Or are they will to see what we have failed: that the last time there was an election in Palestine Mr. Abu Mazen’s party lost. The U.S. program in Iraq is in a shambles, calm and stability are returning to Gaza, questions about the American program for Palestine are being raised in Washington. This is not a time for sudden political movement or a shift in strategy, it is a time for political calculation. Hamas knows it. Israel knows it. Egypt knows it. Saudi Arabia knows it. The only person who doesn’t seem to know it is George Bush.

# 9. Hamas’s reign in Gaza undermines the propaganda of its foes

Some U.S. politicians and Abu Mazen’s more alarmist allies like to paint the Hamas administration in Gaza as a kind of pro-Iranian Islamic State, but this hardly stands up to scrutiny. There is no enforcement of the veil or other conservative Islamic social laws, no Sharia council, no compulsion to attend the mosque. Stability has returned to Gaza. People are obeying the law, and feel secure. This is not a lesson lost on either Egypt or the Israelis. Which would they rather have — civil conflict or civil order?

# 10. Abu Mazen has crossed the line

Several years after my mild confrontation with Mr. Arafat in Gaza, I met with him at his headquarters in Ramallah. It was a bright early April morning and quite memorable for its beauty: just one day after the resolution of the Siege of the Church of the Nativity. Those in the church had, the day before, been sent out of the church to Europe — away from their families and into an involuntary exile. Their departure had been emotional: they had walked out of the church as their families, on the rooftops of Bethlehem, cheered and wept.

The next day I traveled very early to Ramallah to see Arafat to talk to him about the siege. When I arrived I was ushered into his upstairs office. It was just after dawn. I was exhausted, but I found Arafat in a good mood and open to my banter. “I think you crossed a line,” I told him. It was something I would not have dared to say at any other time, but he was smiling at me and so he nodded, as if humoring me. “Oh? he asked. “And what line would that be.” I had him, finally, and so I recited the rule, liturgically: “Palestinians do not send other Palestinians into exile,” I said. He looked at me and nodded and then looked down, suddenly sad. “Yes,” he said. “But I have another line,” and he reflected: “Palestinians do not send other Palestinians to Israeli jails.”

There are lines. Palestinians do not send other Palestinians into exile; Palestinians do not shoot other Palestinians; Palestinians do not betray other Palestinians, Palestinians do not resolve their political differences by gunfire, Palestinians do not collaborate with their enemies, do not betray their own people, Palestinians are not traitors to their own cause, Palestinians do not send Palestinians to Israeli jails. And at one time or another each of these lines has been crossed. But at no time, ever, has any Palestinian ever renounced the one principle — the one true commandment that has motivated every Palestinian patriot from Arafat to Abu Musa to Abu Nidal: that the Palestinian people are indivisible; that they cannot be divided.

Until now. By turning his back on the Palestinians in Gaza, but even actively seeking their impoverishment in the United Nations (as he did, shamefully, on Friday, when his diplomats blocked efforts to seek a Security Council statement on the humanitarian situation there), Abu Mazen has set out to divide the Palestinian nation, to set it against itself. And that line, in the end, cannot be crossed. And the fact that Abu Mazen has crossed it will, in the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people, make all the difference. There is only one Palestine and now, Abu Mazen is not a part of it.

Treachery and Betrayal

I went to Hamas site to view some of the material posted that they claim shows betrayal by certain Fatah officials. It's beyond amazing to see the level of treachery, betrayal and intrigue certain Palestinians were involved in.

I'm not surprised by Dahlan but when you read the communication he had going on with Mofaz, assuming the documents posted by Hamas are legit and I believe they are - it makes you want to vomit.

It's disgusting but that's life, informants, collaborators, traitors and profiteers of all stripes willing to sell their soul are a dime a dozen.

It was interesting to learn recently how former Israeli Teddy Kollak was a British spy - but again, that's life, prostitution might be the oldest profession, betrayal for personal gain is the oldest pastime.

====================================================================================
Hamas to Show an Improved Hand
Organization Aims to Capitalize
On Intelligence Gains From Gaza Takeover
By CAM SIMPSON in Jerusalem and NEIL KING JR. in Washington
July 30, 2007; Page A4

When the Islamist group Hamas conquered the Gaza Strip in June it
seized an intelligence-and-military infrastructure created with U.S.
help by the security chiefs of the Palestinian territory's former
ruler.

According to current and former Israeli intelligence officials, former
U.S. intelligence personnel and Palestinian officials, Hamas has
increased its inventory of arms since the takeover of Gaza and picked
up technical expertise -- such as espionage techniques -- that could
assist the group in its fight against Israel or Washington's
Palestinian allies, the Fatah movement founded by Yasser Arafat.

Hamas leaders say they acquired thousands of paper files, computer
records, videos, photographs and audio recordings containing valuable
and potentially embarrassing intelligence information gathered by
Fatah. For more than a decade, Fatah operated a vast intelligence
network in Gaza established under the tutelage of the Central
Intelligence Agency.
· The Find: Palestinian group Hamas seized rival Fatah's intelligence-
and-military infrastructure, which was built with U.S. help.
· What's at Stake: Secrets, expertise and technology are now in the
hands of a group the U.S. calls a terrorist organization.
· The Damage: Though the ultimate impact is difficult to determine,
Hamas leaders say they will make some details public and share others
with Arab governments.

Hamas leaders are expected as early as tomorrow to go public with some
of the documents and the secrets they hold.

The exact nature of the threat posed by the intelligence grab in Gaza
-- including any damage to U.S. intelligence operations in the
Palestinian territories and the broader Middle East -- is difficult to
ascertain. U.S. and Israeli officials generally tried to play down any
losses, saying any intelligence damage is likely minimal.

But a number of former U.S. intelligence officials, including some who
have worked closely with the Palestinians, said there was ample reason
to worry that Hamas has acquired access to important spying technology
as well as intelligence information that could be helpful to Hamas in
countering Israeli and U.S. efforts against the group.

"People are worried, and reasonably so, about what kind of
intelligence losses we may have suffered," said one former U.S.
intelligence official with extensive experience in Gaza.

A U.S. government official said he doubted serious secrets were
compromised in the Gaza takeover. Other officials said they had no
reason to believe that U.S. spying operations elsewhere in the Arab
world had been compromised.

Close ties between Hamas and the governments of Iran and Syria also
mean that intelligence-and-spying techniques could be shared with the
main Middle East rivals of the Bush administration. As the White House
prepares to lead an international effort to bolster Fatah's security
apparatus in the West Bank, the losses in Gaza stand as an example of
how efforts to help Fatah can backfire.
[Yasser Arafat]

The compromised intelligence Hamas says it now has ranges widely. The
group alleges it has videos used in a sexual-blackmail operation run
by Washington's allies inside Fatah's security apparatus. But the
group also says it has uncovered detailed evidence of Fatah-controlled
spying operations carried out in Arab and Muslim countries for the
benefit of the U.S. and other foreign governments. Hamas also alleges
that Fatah intelligence operatives cooperated with Israeli
intelligence officials to target Islamist leaders for assassination.

"What we have is good enough for us to completely reveal the practices
[of Fatah-controlled security services], both locally and throughout
the region," said Khalil al Hayya, a senior Hamas official in Gaza,
who has assumed a leading role on the intelligence issue for the
Islamist group.

Michael Scheuer, a former top CIA counterterrorism analyst who left
the agency in 2004, said the U.S. had provided the Fatah-controlled
Palestinian Authority with "substantial help" in training as well as
computers, other equipment and analytical tools. Other former
intelligence officials confirmed that the U.S. gave Fatah-controlled
services sophisticated intelligence-gathering equipment, including
eavesdropping technology, though these officials wouldn't provide more
precise details about the technology.

This kind of technology, along with the knowledge it yields, is
broadly known in intelligence circles as "Sigint," which is shorthand
for "signals intelligence." It can include eavesdropping equipment,
devices used for intercepting radio, microwave and telephone
communications and telemetry technology that allows the user to
pinpoint the location of someone holding a communication device, such
as a cellphone.

"The United States invested a lot of effort in setting up this system
in Gaza -- construction, equipment, training... filings, the logistics,
the transportation. It was a big operation, and it's now in the hands
of the other side," said Efraim Halevy, who formerly headed both the
Mossad, which is Israel's foreign-intelligence agency, and Israel's
National Security Council. Mr. Halevy said, however, that he didn't
want to overemphasize the value of Hamas's potential intelligence
gains.

Avi Dichter, Israel's public-security minister and the former head of
Shin Bet, the domestic intelligence-and-counterterrorism agency, also
said he didn't want to overemphasize the potential benefits to Hamas.
But he confirmed that the Islamist group seized Sigint technology and
expertise during its Gaza sweep. He declined to provide specifics, but
said it had been provided by the Americans, the British and the
French.
[George Tenet]

Mr. Dichter, who left the Shin Bet when his five-year term as its
chief ended in 2005, also said the potential damage goes beyond
Hamas's ability to turn the technology against its enemies. Now, he
said, the militants could gain an understanding of how such technology
is used against them, allowing them to adopt more sophisticated
counter measures.

"It's not only the tools. It's also the philosophy that's behind
them," he said.

Hamas leaders are being vague about the equipment and technological
know-how they captured. Mr. Hayya said some important former Fatah
operatives in Gaza, all of whom were granted amnesty after Hamas took
over, were now cooperating with the group on intelligence matters.

Easier to assess is the threat posed by the military hardware Hamas
picked up after the takeover. The militant group seized an arsenal of
arms and munitions captured from U.S.-backed security forces loyal to
Fatah and its leader, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

Mr. Dichter said Hamas gained roughly the same number of weapons
during a few days that it would have taken the group nearly a year to
amass from smuggling operations.

Hamas says it is using the armaments to build a popular army in Gaza.
Israeli intelligence and security officials estimate the Islamist
group has some 13,000 armed men in Gaza.

As for Fatah's secrets, Hamas leaders say they grabbed intelligence
stashes from three locations: the headquarters in Gaza City of the
Preventive Security Force; the Palestinian Authority intelligence
headquarters, which were housed in a Gaza City office known as "Il
Safina," or "the ship"; and a nearby satellite-intelligence office
dubbed, "Il Mashtal," or "the nursery."

As Hamas fighters moved in during their June sweep across Gaza, Fatah
officials burned some papers and stripped data from computers. But the
Hamas conquest was so quick that significant caches remained for the
taking, according to the militant group.

All three sites were long under the sway of Fatah strongman Mohammed
Dahlan, who first became an important CIA ally in Gaza in 1996. At the
time, then-CIA director George Tenet began working openly with Mr.
Dahlan and other Palestinian officials to build up security services
aimed at combating the rise of Hamas and like-minded extremist groups
that rejected the Oslo peace accords.

Through a spokesman, Mr. Tenet declined to comment on the CIA-Fatah
cooperation, his relationship with Mr. Dahlan or Hamas's gains. Mr.
Dahlan on Thursday formally resigned his Palestinian Authority post.
Mr. Dahlan hasn't commented publicly since resigning and he couldn't
be located for comment. Associates in the West Bank said he was
abroad.

Mr. Hayya, the senior Hamas leader, said hundreds of the group's
Hamas's operatives have been culling through and analyzing the
intelligence troves since their seizure, with specialists in security,
forensic accounting and administration conducting detailed
assessments. Significant portions of these assessments are close to
completion, Mr. Hayya said.

Some of the most potentially explosive claims from Hamas center on the
alleged activities beyond the Gaza Strip of Palestinian agents loyal
to Fatah. Mr. Hayya alleged the CIA utilized Palestinian agents for
covert intelligence operations in other Middle Eastern countries.
Hamas, he said, now possesses a roadmap detailing the names and
actions of "those men whom thought were going to continue to be their
hand across the region."

Some former U.S. intelligence officials who worked closely with the
Palestinian Authority confirmed that such overseas spying arrangements
beyond Gaza existed with the Palestinians in the past and said they
likely continued, bolstering the credibility of Hamas's claims.

Whitley Bruner, a longtime CIA officer in the Middle East, recalled
that "some of our first really good information on [Osama] bin Laden
in Sudan" in the early 1990s "came from Palestinian sources." Before
leaving the agency in 1997, Mr. Bruner participated in many of the
first cooperative sessions organized by Mr. Tenet between the CIA and
the Palestinians.

"It's not unlikely that continued to do things for the U.S. well
beyond the territories," Mr. Bruner said. "Palestinians are embedded
all over the place, so they have access to things that the U.S.
doesn't."

Others are more circumspect. Bruce Reidel, who worked for nearly 30
years as a U.S. Middle East specialist, both as a CIA intelligence
officer and as an adviser to Presidents Clinton and Bush, said there
is sure to be "quite a treasure trove of materials that would document
relationship with the CIA." Mr. Reidel said during his time in
government, which ended in 2005, "the Palestinians were always trying
to prove that they had unique access and information," but he said he
was skeptical of Hamas's claims that such operations ventured far
beyond Gaza and the West Bank.

Mr. Hayya alleges that while many officials from Arab and Muslim
nations knew Mr. Dahlan was cooperating with U.S. intelligence
agencies inside the Palestinian territories, many of those same
leaders "are going to be amazed and surprised when they discover had
actually worked against them for the Americans." He wouldn't directly
answer a question about which nations were allegedly being spied on,
but he said Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates had the
most to be concerned about from potential disclosures.

Jabril Rajoub, a Fatah rival to Mr. Dahlan who was long his West Bank
counterpart and most recently served as Mr. Abbas's national security
adviser, said he was aware of the alleged outlines of these
operations, though he said he was unaware of their details. He called
the Gaza-based network a "for-hire" intelligence operation, adding
that it was active around the Middle East and provided information to
the Americans, the British and others.

Mr. Hayya also said there is a substantial amount of evidence
detailing cooperation between Fatah and Israel. There is evidence
several militant leaders were targeted as a result of such
cooperation, he alleged. This includes circumstantial evidence that he
was personally targeted in an Israeli assassination attempt after he
was fingered by Fatah intelligence officers as a top security threat.

After taking over Gaza, Mr. Hayya said Hamas recovered notes from a
meeting of senior Palestinian Authority intelligence officials in
which they discussed Mr. Hayya's value to the Islamist group. On May
20, less than a week after the meeting, an Israeli missile was fired
into his home, killing eight people. Mr. Hayya was en route at the
time, but says the strike came about five minutes after his 35-year-
old cousin, Ibrahim, entered the home. The Hamas leader said he and
his cousin look very similar.

"They thought it was me," he said.

A spokeswoman for the Shin Bet declined to comment.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118575064310581669.html

Hamas,Mickey Mouse and Other Horror Stories

Hamas, Mickey Mouse And
Other Horror Stories:
Those Violent Palestinians Again

By Agustin Velloso

22 May, 2007
Countercurrents.org


The same thing applies to Palestinian violence as to United States democracy: all the news media talk frequently about it but none of them has ever seen it as it really is. The abundance of news aimed at reporting the intrinsic evil of the Palestinians is impressive. Last week one could see at peak viewing time Palestinian pre-school teachers using Mickey Mouse to teach kids they must wipe out Jews, make martyrs of themselves, fight to take over the world and so on. What a headline! What depth of Middle East conflict analysis! Those children and their parents before them have been subjected to constant Israeli bombing for years - attacks that cause dead and wounded by the thousand - and yet, to the leading lights of journalism, what matters, or rather what they are interested in broadcasting, is that the children of these victims are taught from infancy to turn into Islamist terrorists.

Would not the contrary be news, according to a golden rule of the profession? To their tormentors, Palestinian children write poems of love - orphaned by Israeli bombs that have killed their parents, starving hungry thanks to a criminal blockade by Israel and its allies, with no hope of leaving that hell since the United Nations is in no hurry to oblige Israel to abandon the Occupied Territories (after 40 years of illegal occupation now) as it was to force Iraq to abandon Kuwait (after 6 months).

In that same week an Israeli soldier, in a punishment operation in Nablus, killed an unborn Palestinian whose mother is still lying wounded in hospital. Maha Katouri, a 30 year old Palestinian mother lost the child in her womb, seven months into the pregnancy, to a bullet that perforated her abdomen and destroyed her unborn baby's head. Non-news is that the Israeli soldier who fired the shot is in Occupied Palestinian territory illegally: non-news also are his orders to shoot to kill
Palestinians, including women and children in their houses, not because Israel faces non-existent Arab aggression, but rather to contribute, death by death, captive by captive, eviction by eviction, to the genocide of the Palestinians. For the international community the latest anniversary of the final solution of the Jewish Question which ended with the complete defeat of the Nazi regime is news. Non-news is the continuing final solution of the Palestinian Question, begun with the establishment of Israel and which every Israeli government since 1948 has continued with the blessing of that same international community.

Just-barely-news is that the same week a dozen Palestinians have died and many more have been wounded at Israel's hands. Non-news is that the remainder suffers the effects of an international economic blockade applied to a population under military
occupation by a member country of the United Nations. Also non-news is that every last bullet has been paid for by the United States which subsidises Israel's
army of occupation with US$3 billion a year.

News is the falsehood that Condi Rice travels to Jerusalem to promote peace. Non-news is that the European Union approves Israel's genocidal policy, since it does nothing to make Israel respect UN resolutions and international humanitarian law. News is that the European Union does not talk with the Hamas government, which has not occupied Israel and has not broken international law, because purportedly it includes extremists.

Non-news is that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children receive daily from the Israeli Mickey Mouse throughout their lives an education far more effective
than one that even the most intelligent Palestinian teacher could not devise: Occupier education. This teaches them the Occupier is much stronger than the
occupied and thus to abandon the land the Occupier covets or take the consequences, which are non-news or old news: a wall that condemns them to live in a prison, demolition house by house to make way for colonies exclusively for Jews, the loss of means to make a living so that they emigrate and, above all, prison (Israeli prisons hold 11,000 Palestinian captives) and death (5000 Palestinian dead since 2000)
for resisting all the foregoing.

Non-news is that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children grow up traumatized by the extreme violence to which they are subjected by the fourth most powerful army in the world, equipped with F-16 fighter bombers, Merkava tanks and snipers whom Israel daily sends into the Occupied Territories to fire on the unarmed civilian population. News, on the other hand, is that Israeli children in Sderot suffer psychological stress from Qassam rockets, whose minimal destructive capacity, however, is non-news: a total of seven people in Israel have died from 4500 launches since 2001. Non-news too is that between ten and twenty Palestinians regularly die from a single Israeli missile.

It is unreasonable for these journalists and editors to report stress suffered by children in Sderot but not that of Palestinian children. Nor is it credible that these reporters and opinion-formers cannot work out that the ambience of extreme violence in which Palestinian children live not only explains why they sing songs that help them endure the terror they live through, but also that it is the inevitable result of Israel's criminal policies. It is impossible to understand that the news is not the friendly Mickey Mouse as a teaching aid for Palestinian kids, but
rather the terrifying Israeli soldier that shoots them point blank.

So why then do they publish news as they do?Because they are supporters of Israel, racist towards Palestinians and anti-Islamic or all these at once. Except to those unwilling to see, this is so obvious that its demonstration has not even needed the mention in this article of what some might say is fundamental: that the Mickey Mouse news item is a fake. Its falsity parallels the fraud used years ago to justify the
first attack on Iraq: that Iraqis were killing newborns by tearing them from incubators. The daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador in the United States enjoyed
a universal audience to watch her weep as she related this event, which existed entirely in her imagination. The correction of her false witness was much more
discreet.

The Palestinian Mickey Mouse story is yet one more of the numerous lies disseminated by Israel and taken as it stood by Western journalists. The translation of
the Mickey Mouse words, again, as happens with statements about Israel attributed to Ahmedinejad and in other cases too, is corrupt. But which news outlet is going to ask for an explanation from the people who distributed it? Which TV presenter is going to
publicly admit they were fooled? Which chief editor is going to confess that they failed to check the - obviously Israeli - source?

Democratic Debate

The democratic debate last night couldn't be any more boring or pathetic in it's utter superficiality and scripted blandness. I just can't imagine any democrat walked away from that debate feeling any better about their choices. We all know Kucinich and Gravel made the most sense but we also know commonsense is not what always sells in American politics. The group think is in place as we don't see much daylight between the top 5 and the bottom two figures become decoration. I have a strong feeling people will tire with this group of democrats very quickly. It seems the more people watch these characters, the less good they see in them. Hilary was her robotic screechy self. Biden was in his I'm the smartest and coolest guy in the crowd and I got a big mouth to prove it routine. Obama is sliding deeper into no mans land where his words are coming more and more from scripted pollsters than coming from his heart. His star is fading. Edwards killed himself saying first thing he would do is travel all around the world. It's not smart to tell the people who will hire you during wartime that your first priority is to get on a Air Force One and travel the world to spread some love. I didn't get that one. Edwards should have enough commonsense to know actions speak louder than words. If he wants to re-establish America's moral authority - no meeting can take the place of taking action. Everyone but those in Foxland know why we are hated all over the world. The closure of Guantanamo for starters, the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and the pressuring of Israel to withdraw to 67 borders would do more to re-establishing our moral authority than anything a trip around the globe will accomplish.

He looked and sounded very light. The Hilary is not electable bandwagon will start adding passengers soon. I still think we have a few surprises ahead of us. I wouldn't discount Gore jumping in.

Israel testing new weapon in Gaza

Gaza horror show continues. Israel testing new weapons on it's imprisoned natives.

Is Bush's America a fascist state?

Bush's America

Imprisoning a Whole Nation

May 24, 2007
Imprisoning a Whole Nation
by John Pilger

Israel is being allowed to destroy the very notion of a state of Palestine and is imprisoning an entire nation. That is clear from the latest attacks on Gaza, whose suffering has become a metaphor for the tragedy imposed on the peoples of the Middle East and beyond. These attacks, reported on Britain's Channel 4 News, were "targeting key militants of Hamas" and the "Hamas infrastructure." The BBC described a "clash" between the same militants and Israeli F-16 aircraft.


After reading John Pilger's article, I couldn't help but think of a funny line by comedienne Bobcat Goldthwait: "If you ever see me getting beaten by the police, put down the video camera and come help me."

It's not so funny as it relates to Gaza. It's amazing how the entire world is watching the horror show in Gaza and the silence is deafening. Gaza has been described as the real life "Truman Show". There are cameras everywhere, many are surveillance cameras installed by Israel, but no shortage of reporters as well and how is it this abomination continues with the full knowledge of the world?

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised as history is filled with atrocities where people and nations often looked the other way.

I feel the Gaza and Palestinian situation is different than other cases, including current cases such the Congo or Tibet, in that there are no shortages of cameras in Gaza as opposed to the two I mentioned. It can be argued the same for events in WW2 with Hitler's extermination camps and the Cambodian killing fields and many other historic tragedies, lack of information and cameras we believed made the war crimes possible - so we were told. The Gaza situation debunks the myth, "if only you shed light on something" and expose it to the light of day, then people will be informed and act to prevent such atrocities.

This begs the question - why? Jewish victimhood status - perennial victims - and years of propaganda strengthening such views, with European guilt over the holocaust neutralizing any criticism of Israel and many other factors, mostly power politics in America and Madison avenue spin, all work to shield Israel from having to account for any of it's war crimes.

Sands of Sorrow - Israeli War Criminals Genocide against Palestinians

Palestinian Refugees since 1940s were persecuted and killed and humiliated just because there are not jewish. This is a holocoust against beautiful innocent people, who lived there for millenia. See this israeli invention: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8047351706461342401&q=uranium&pl=true

Gaza - Sands of Sorrow

Sands of Sorrow film done in 1950 gives us the context needed to understand events in Gaza today. You can't look at Gaza today without understanding the historical context. I would say around 97% Gazans today had homes inside of Israel prior to 1948. They were ethnically cleansed and pushed to the edge of the sea--and had the sea not been there, they would have been pushed further out by the Israeli's WITHOUT A DOUBT.

What is ironic here is how Zionist propaganda kept repeating the mantra how the Arabs wanted "to throw the Jews out in the sea" when in reality it was Zionist Jews who were literarly throwing Palestinians to sea. The evidence is Gaza itself, a 13 mile strip on the edge of Mediterrenan Sea, with over 1.3 million Palestinians crammed in and surrounded by prison walls as high as 30 ft in height.

This film is a must see to get a better understanding of why today Gaza is a tinder box. The crimes against these people are genocidal in scope.

Alternative Approaches to Palestinian-Israeli Co-existence

I provide a draft of alternative approaches to Palestinian-Israeli co-existence written by Howard Cort to illustrate how far we are to achieving anything remotely close to co-existence. All the approaches listed below, not ONE is actually being talked about( in a serious way) in Israel - and to some degree many of the proposals here are not even debated in Palestine, although the one state solution has been suggested by some groups. These are exactly the kind of debates we should be having regarding the kind of state or states that should be created to achieve true peace and co-existence but I know for a fact such proposals are dead on arrival in Israel. I believe many of the suggestions below will find support in Palestine. The main obstacle to such a visionary approach to this conflict is and has always been Zionism ideology itself. Jews need to reach a post-Zionist state before we can even begin talking about federations and power-sharing or all the other attributes involved in any state structure that aims to promote co-existence and unity among competing groups of different ethnic or religious make-up. At this point, the fetish with a "Jewish state" takes precedent above and beyond any other consideration--that includes the viability in the long run of a such a narrowly defined and exclusive state based on a religion. It seems suicidal to continue on the Zionist track but then again whoever said Jews were averse to calamity. It's clear to me either some arrangements are made for co-existence or the track of co-annihilation will prove fatal to one party in this conflict. I don't see the Palestinians going anywhere or the 300 million Arabs going anywhere, so you would think sanity would prevail in Zion to come up with some solution that would make co-existence a reality - don't hold your breath!




=====================================================================================

ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI COEXISTENCE



DRAFT – May 11, 2007



Howard Cort

3121 N. Sheridan Rd., #509

Chicago, IL 60657-4913

773-472-7828

howard@empireone.net




ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI COEXISTENCE

By Howard Cort



INTRODUCTION

Several years ago, I came across, on the Internet, a special issue of the Boston Review (December 2001/January 2002) presenting a forum on binationalism in the Israel/Palestine context. As I read the various articles, I realized that I had come across other articles, elsewhere, on the same topic. Then I came upon Ehud Tokatly's HopeWays website, which includes a variety of approaches to Palestinian/Israeli coexistence. These are categorized in a table divided into several sections, including Federal State, One State – Multiple Systems, Bi-National State, Confederation, and Innovative Partition Models (1). Later, I was pleased to obtain a publication of the Palestinian Academic Study for the Study of International Affairs called IMPASSE: Exploring Alternative Solutions to the Palestine-Israel Conflict, as well as a report on a forum on the two-state solution in the Fall/Autumn 2005 Arab World Geographer.

I began to promote the idea of a compilation of a compendium of alternative approaches to Palestinian-Israeli coexistence, including introducing, and seeing passed, a provision to this effect in a larger Israel/Palestine resolution at the 2004 Biennial Convention of the United Nations Association (UNA/USA). Similarly, I requested the opportunity to conduct a workshop on this topic at the first national convention of Jewish Voice for Peace, which was held in April 2007.

It is my conviction, based on a principle I learned from Arthur E. Morgan, first chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), that as wide a range of alternatives as possible should be examined before making decisions, particularly in cases of important public policy. Thus, I hope that the material here presented will be a modest but useful contribution toward carrying out that conviction and principle in the context of one of the world's most difficult problems. There are many omissions that I know about, and I'm sure there are others that I have missed. It is also possible that a comprehensive solution might result from combining elements of two or more proposals.

Please also note that there is considerable overlapping and that some items could fall into more than one category.

1. ONE STATE

A. One Unitary State: Majority rule; single, centralized national tier of government; human rights agenda; “. . . democratic, egalitarian system anchored in a constitution guaranteeing equality” (2 ); “mutual guarantees would have to ensure both Arab and Jewish collective interests, particularly in the transition” (3); “it allows all the people to live in and enjoy the entire country while protecting their distinctive communities and addressing their particular needs” (4).

B. Unitary Decentralized: “The political power of government in [unitary] states may well be transferred to lower levels, to regionally or locally elected assemblies, governors and mayors (‘devolved government’), but the central government retains the principal right to recall such delegated power” (5).

C. Consociational State: “. . . a state which has major internal divisions along ethnic, religious, or linguistic lines, yet nonetheless manages to remain stable, due to consultation among the elites of each of its major social groups. Consociational states are often contrasted with states with majority rule. Classical examples of consociational states are Belgium, Switzerland, Israel, and the Netherlands” (6). NOTE: Elsewhere, Belgium, Switzerland, and India are commonly considered to be federations, and the Israel example is controversial. Recent developments in South Africa, Bosnia, and Northern Ireland are in the direction of consociation.

D. Other: Sam Greenlaw has proposed One Country, Two Systems, modeled “on the Chinese experience with Hong Kong and Macao” and borrowing details from Switzerland (7). Noam Chomsky has suggested “parallel national institutions throughout the whole territory with a free option for each individual; and also the option of dissociation from national institutions with retention of full rights for those who prefer” (8). Moammar Gadhafi has proposed a state composed of both Palestinians and Israelis “allowing both to move wherever they will” (9). Daniel Gavron’s State of Jerusalem establishes in all of the Holy Land a pluralistic multiethnic democracy “based on the principle of one-person-one-vote” (10). Theodore Patterson’s Co-existence through Acceptance calls for “strong international political governance” (11).

2. FEDERATION

A. Central Government: “A federation is a union comprising a number of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central (‘federal’) government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states is constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the central government” (12).

B. Symmetric Federalism: Every component state of a federation possesses the same powers (13).

C. Asymmetric Federalism: “Some federations are called assymmetric [sic] because some states have more autonomy than others, although they have the same constitutional status” (14).

D. Horizontal/Vertical Combination: Meron Benvenisti suggests “a combination of horizontal division (sharing in government) and a vertical division (partitioning of the territory). What I see is a federal structure that will include all of historic western Palestine. Different ethnic cantons will exist under that structure. It's clear, for example, that the Palestinian citizens of Israel will have their own cantons. They will have their own autonomy, which will express their collective rights. And it's clear, on the other side, that the settlers will have a canton. The executive of the federal government will strike some sort of balance between the two national groups” (15).

E. Swiss Vertical Division: The basic division of Swiss politics is the “gemeinde” or “commune,” whose semi-sovereignty, in relation to the canton, is similar to the canton’s semi-sovereignty in relation to the federation (16).

F. Other Proposals: Elon Jarden calls for a federal constitution, with several cantons, as determined by its established assembly, in accordance with demographic patterns of the country’s regions (17). Amos Shuveli suggests a federal constitution under which cantons will enjoy a greater or lesser level of autonomy and in which 50 percent of the parliament is elected on a regional/canton basis and 50 percent on a national or party basis (18). Ehud Tokatly’s Non-Territorial Federalism grants all national groups “a considerable measure of control over their lives, thus allowing all citizens, Jews and Arabs of all kinds, to enjoy a just, pluralistic society with a stronger, more democratic government” (19).

3. BINATIONAL STATE

A. Federal: "In a bi-national state, Jews and Palestinians would coexist as separate communities in a federal arrangement. Each people would run its own affairs autonomously and be guaranteed the legal right to use its own language, religion and traditions. Both would participate in government in a single parliament, which would be concerned with matters of supra-communal importance, defense, resources, the economy, and so on. Such a state could be modeled on the cantonal structure of Switzerland or the bi-national arrangement of Belgium. In the Palestine/Israel case, the cantonal structure would be based on the present demographic pattern of the country where densely populated areas like the Galilee would become Arab cantons, and Jewish ones like Tel Aviv would be Jewish cantons, and so on. This leaves a number of practical issues to be resolved, as for example, the exact composition and powers of the parliament, the exercise of the right of return for Jews and that for Arabs and so on” (20).

B. Unitary or Federal: “A bi-national state is a state made up two nations whose constitution recognizes both as state-forming nations, irrespective of their size. The constitution of such a state can be unitary or federal, as long as it is based on two nations being legally recognized as state-forming nations" (21).

C. Political Arrangement Unchangeable by Majority Vote: "It is a land of two peoples who live there or should live there by equal national right; any political institution must be based solely on a political arrangement which cannot be changed for the worse by majority vote" (22).

D. Mutual Security: "Viewing themselves as ‘pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian’, they conceive Jewish/Israeli or Palestinian security as unattainable absent a secure life for the other" (23).

E. Alternative Palestinian Agenda: Nasser Abufarha's detailed “Proposal for an Alternative Configuration in Palestine-Israel” characterizes the configuration as “a Federal Union that guarantees access to the whole space of Palestine-Israel, and at the same time protects the national identity and cultural expression of both societies through sovereignty over designated territories based on the natural landscape and current demographics of this shared space" (24).

F. Zionist Binationalists: Speaking at a roundtable discussion in London in the summer of 1946, Jewish philosopher Martin Buber said, "A solution giving to either side the right of domination would lead to a sudden catastrophe. The only solution that would not lead to a catastrophe, but only to a difficult situation for some time, is the creation of a bi-national state. That is, putting Jews and Arabs together in a kind of condominium and giving them the maximum of common administration possible in a given hour. They would have equal rights, these two nations, as nations, irrespective of numbers" (25).

G. Three-State Confederation: The confederation would consist of a Jewish State of Israel, an Arab State of Palestine, and a Binational State of Israel-Palestine. Israeli citizenship would be open to any current citizen of Israel, and some opportunities for citizenship would be offered to Palestinian refugees. Permanent residency status would be guaranteed to all current Israeli citizens and their descendents, whether or not they opted to become citizens of Israel, Palestine, or Israel/Palestine (26).

4. CONDOMINIUM

"In international law, . . . a condominium is a political territory (state or border area) in or over which two or more sovereign powers formally agree to share equally dominium (in the sense of sovereignty) and exercise their rights jointly, without dividing up into 'national' zones” (27). A possible example is Jerusalem as the capital for both Palestinians and Israelis. Ervin Kedar’s USIP – United “State of Israel” and Palestine (Condominium) – is based on joint sovereignty (28).

5. PERSONAL UNION

“A personal union is a relationship of two or more entities that are considered separate, sovereign states, which, through established law, share the same person as their respective head of state. It is not to be confused with a federation, which internationally is considered as a single state. . . . personal unions are almost entirely a product of monarchies” (29). Nonetheless, it is a conceivable arrangement.

6. TWO STATES

A. Growing Western Consensus: (1) no (or extremely limited "right of return" of refugees; (2) a fully shared Jerusalem; (3) reciprocal territorial exchanges; (4) demilitarization of the Palestinian state (30).

B. Arab Peace Initiative Adopted at the March, 2002, Beirut Summit:

Partial contents: “. . . full Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights to the lines of June 4, 1967 as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon. . . . Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194. . . . The acceptance of the establishment of a Sovereign Independent Palestinian State on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital. . . . Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace. . . . rejection of all Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries” (31).

C. Parity for Peace: Esther Riley’s detailed proposal for two states on the same land, with bilateral governance and equal access by all individuals to resources (32).

D. Dual: "One superimposed on the other." Both individuals and geographic units have free choice as to which system to belong. Citizenship would not be bound by territory, but by choice. Geographic units could be like Swiss cantons, with an administrative structure like Switzerland’s (33).

E. Sovereignty Shift Lines (S.S.L): Elad Rubin’s proposal to uphold the Palestinian “Right of Return” and the “Jewish Right of Inhabitancy” by allowing Palestinian refugees to return to parts of Israel that would be equal in size to the areas occupied by settlements in the territories. Jews and Palestinians would have sovereignty over their own areas (34).

7. CONFEDERATION

A. Weaker Central Government: “. . . an association of sovereign states or communities, usually created by treaty but often later adopting a common constitution. Confederations tend to be established for dealing with critical issues, such as defense, foreign affairs, foreign trade, and a common currency, with the central government being required to provide support for all members” (35). "Currently, a confederation is considered a state or entity similar in pyramidal structure to a federation but with a weaker central government. A confederation may also consist of member states which, while temporarily pooling sovereignty in certain areas, are considered entirely sovereign and retain the right of unilateral secession” (36).

B. Binational Confederation: Jerome Siegel’s plan calls for a three-state framework: a Jewish State of Israel, an Arab State of Palestine, and a Binational State of Israel-Palestine. Each state will have veto power. “Any citizen of a member state will automatically be a citizen of the Confederation. . . . All citizenship in the Confederation’s member states will require a choice of citizenship by the adult populations,” with joint and tri-state citizenship possible. Israeli citizenship “will be open to any current citizen of Israel (Jewish, Palestinian or otherwise).” Palestinian citizenship “will be open to all Palestinians, whether residing in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem or outside, whether refugees or not.” Palestine may offer citizenship “to Israelis currently residing within the original territory of Palestine (e.g., settlers).” Binational state citizenship “will be open to anyone eligible for citizenship in either state, but citizenship in one of the two states will not be required for eligibility. Thus some Israelis and Palestinians may be citizens only of the Binational State, whereas others may enjoy dual or even three-way citizenship.”

Equal territorial contributions to the Binational State will be made by Israel and Palestine “from their areas of original sovereignty.” Palestinian refugees will have a right to citizenship both in Palestine and in the Binational State. Some refugees may become permanent Israeli residents and some opportunities for Israeli citizenship will also be provided (37).

C. The Israeli-Palestinian Confederation: Joseph Avesar’s plan calls for a coalition of representatives from Israel or the Palestinian territories (or state) that would act alongside the existing Israeli and Palestinian governments. The confederation would serve as a mechanism for establishing projects of mutual benefit. Israel and Palestine would be divided into 300 districts, each sending one delegate to the confederation legislature. Both Israel and Palestine would have a veto over any confederation legislation (38).

D. The Confederation of the Levant: Fred Foldvary’s confederation would have (a) courts to resolve interstate disputes and a police force for law enforcement; (b) a foreign service for defense and foreign affairs (although Israel and Palestine would still be able to maintain diplomatic relations with foreign states, with gradual transference of some military to the confederation “as it gains confidence in its viability”); and (c) a two-house legislature, with one elected on the basis of population and the other with a fixed number of representatives per state (39).

E. Regional Confederation: Various plans have been proposed, including for Palestine/ Israel/Jordan; Palestine/Israel/Jordan/Lebanon (and possibly Syria); and a wider Confederation of Middle Eastern States, such as was promoted for many years by New Outlook Magazine, a now defunct organ of the Israeli Mapam Party.

Early on, Joseph Abileah proposed a Jordan/Palestine/Israel Confederation, with economic integration facilitating a solution to the refugee problem, an immediate irrigation system in the Syrian Desert, a religious council forming a second parliamentary house, and being open to any other country in the Middle East (40).

F. Two-Stage Solution: Under Jeff Halper’s proposal, two separate states would have various economic and cultural connections designed to lead to one state in the future, under a wider Middle East Union in which residency is separated from citizenship (41).

8. OTHER

A. The Brazilian Contribution: Claude G. S. Martins has suggested that “the international community can assist in relieving the population pressures on the region’s environmental conditions through providing all communities with opportunities to emigrate to other countries. Brazil, for instance, can offer a new base for Jewish and Palestinian communities, in which the national cultural identity of both can remain intact regardless of their physical location of residence and which will not require individuals to give up their current citizenship, nor their national aspirations” (42).

B. Palestinian Academics: The Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs has published a book on alternative solutions to the conflict (43).

C. Forum on the Two-State Solution: The Arab World Geographer, a quarterly journal published by the Department of Geography at the University of Akron, in Akron, Ohio, has an issue devoted to the viability of the two-state solution and possible alternatives (44).

NOTES

1. “HopeWays’ Peace Voices Analysis,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

2. Mazin B. Qumsiyeh (professor and author), Sharing the Land of Canaan (London and Sterling, VA: Pluto Press, 2004), p. 214; see also http://qumsiyeh.org/.

3. Virginia Tilley (associate professor, Hobart and William Smith College), The One-State Solution (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 2005), p. 220.

4. Ali Abunimah (editor, Electronic Intifada), One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse (New York: Henry Holt and Company, Metropolitan Books, 2006); see also http/www.electronicintifada.org.

5. Wikipedia, s.v. “Unitary state,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_state (accessed April 26, 2007).

6. Wikipedia, s.v. “Consociational state,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consociational_state (accessed April 26, 2007).

7. Sam Greenlaw (database architect and Oracle DBA), “One Country, Two Systems,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

8. Noam Chomsky (professor, linguist), Peace in the Middle East? (New York: Vintage Books, 1974, as quoted in Fred Foldvary, “Peace Through Confederal Democracy and Economic Justice,” Peace Through Justice and Self-defense, http://www.foldvary.net/works/globcon.html.

9. Moammar Ghadhafi (Libya’s leader), “Isratine: Peace Proposal by Moammar Ghadhafi?” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

10. Daniel Gavron (author, journalist), “The State of Jerusalem: Opportunity and Challenge for Israelis and Palestinians – and Others,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

11. Theodore A. Patterson (author), “Coexistence Through Acceptance – UN Involvement and Citizen Empowerment,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

12. Wikipedia, s.v. “Federation,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation (accessed April 26, 2007).

13. Wikipedia, s.v. “Federation,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation (accessed March 27, 2007).

14. Wikipedia, s.v. “Federation,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation (accessed April 26, 2007).

15. Meron Benvenisti (geographer and academic), “Cry the Beloved Two-State Solution,” Ha’aretz, August 6, 2003, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=326313.

16. Jonathan Steinberg (reader in modern European history, University of Cambridge), Why Switzerland? 2nd. ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p.78.

17. Elon Jarden (author), “Federation – Not Separation,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

18. Amos Shuveli (author), “Is There a Hope in This Country?” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

19. Ehud Tokatly (author, media expert, editor of HopeWays), “Community Democracy,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

20. Ghada Karmi (academic and author), “A Secular Democratic State in Historic Palestine,” first published in Al-Adab (Lebanon), July 2002, One-State.org, http://web.archive.org/web/20040805065028/http://www.one-state.org/articles/2002/karmi.htm.

21. Susan Hattis (editor of the Knesset website), “Roundtable – Bi-Nationalism,” http://www.passia.org/meetings/2000/biNation.html.

22.Yosef Luria (journalist), in Solveig Eggerz, “More Than a Nation: The Cultural Zionism of Martin Buber,” Issues of The American Council For Judaism (Fall 1998), http://www.acjna.org/acjna/articles_detail.aspx?id=98.

23. Mark A. LeVine (professor of modern Middle Eastern history, culture, and Islamic studies, University of California, Irvine), “The New Jewish Bi-Nationalism,” October 14, 2006, History News Network, http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/30789.html.

24. Nasser Abufarha (anthropologist and entrepreneur), “Proposal for an Alternative Configuration in Palestine-Israel,” Alternative Palestinian Agenda, http://www.ap-agenda.org/initiative.htm.

25. Paul Mendes-Flohr, ed., A Land of Two Peoples: Martin Buber on Jews and Arabs, University of Chicago Press edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), p. 205.

26. See note 37 below.

27. Wikipedia, “Condominium (international law),” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condominium_%28international_law%29 (accessed April 26, 2007).

28. Ervin Y. Kedar (professor), “USIP – The United ‘State of Israel’ and Palestine (Condominium),” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

29. Wikipedia, s.v. “Personal union,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_union (accessed April 26, 2007).

30. Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski (professor, former US national security adviser), speech at Chicago Council on Global Affairs, April 4, 2007, http://www.thechicagocouncil.org/podcast_details.php?podcast_id=26.

31. “Text of Arab Peace Initiative Adopted at Beirut Summit” (“official translation of the Saudi-proposed Arab peace initiative adopted at the annual Arab summit in Beirut, as published on the Arab League internet site”), Agence France-Presse [AFP], March 28, 2002, http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/5a7229b652beb9c5c1256b8a0054b62e.

32. Esther Riley (author, editor), “Parity for Peace in Israel/Palestine: Two States on the Same Land, with Bilateral Governance,” www.parityforpeace.org.

33. Mathias Mossberg (vice president for programs, East-West Institute), “Instead of Two States Side by Side, Why Not One Superimposed on the Other?” The Guardian, July 4, 2006, http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1812080,00.html.

34. Elad Rubin (author), “S.S.L. – Sovereignty Shift Lines: A Solution for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm (or http://www.peaceways.net/peacelines.htm).

35.Wikipedia, s.v. “Confederation,” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation (accessed April 26, 2007).

36. Ibid.

37. Jerome Siegel (senior research scholar at the University of Maryland’s Center for International and Security Studies), “A Binational Confederation,” Boston Review (December2001/January 2002), http://bostonreview.net/BR26.6/segal.html.

38. Tom Tugend (contributing editor), “Lawyer Floats Own Peace Plan at UCLA,” The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles, March 17, 2006, http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/searchview.php?id=15573
.

39. Fred E. Foldvary (lecturer in economics at Santa Clara University), “Peace Through Confederal Democracy and Economic Justice,” Peace Through Justice and Self-defense, http://www.foldvary.net/works/globcon.html.

40. Joseph Abileah (professor, author), “Joseph Abileah – Confederation in the Middle East,” The Mondcivitan (Spring 1972), The Hugh and Helene Schonfield World Service Trust, http://www.schonfield.org/5536.html.

41. Jeff Halper (anthropologist, coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions [ICAHD]), Obstacles to Peace: A Reframing of Palestinian-Israeli Conflict, 3rd Edition (Bethlehem, West Bank: Palestine Mapping Center, April 4, 2005); also, Jeff Halper, “Towards a Middle East Union,” Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, http://icahd.org/eng/articles.asp?menu=6&submenu=2&article=132.

42. Claudia G. S. Martins (Brazilian geographer), “The Brazilian Contribution to Palestinian-Israeli Peace,” HopeWays, http://hopeways.org/e_index.htm.

43. Dr. Mahdi Abdul Hadi (head of the Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs [PASSIA]), ed., Palestinian-Israeli IMPASSE: Exploring Alternative Solutions to the Palestine-Israel Conflict (Jerusalem: PASSIA

Publications, August, 2005).

44. The Arab World Geographer 8, no. 3 (Autumn 2005), http://users.fmg.uva.nl/vmamadouh/awg

Pan-Islamism replacing Pan-Arabism?

Support for extremists Islamic groups has soared recently in the Arab world. Nationalist leaders, secularists and even Pan-Arabists failed miserably in so many fronts that it left a vacuum for Islamist parties to take over. The Islamists are providing social networks that help poor people and offer free medical care and schools to people that have been neglected by the ruling elites. But beyond this phenomenon in impoverished areas like Southern Lebanon and Gaza, Islamists are winning in countries like Jordan, Egypt and other parts of the Arab world where elections are allowed. Failure of secular nationalists to provide an alternative is why Islamists have been able to gain traction. What is also driving people to Islamists parties is this notion of being independent from American control and dictates. An Islamist Party leader is not going to care what Bush says or thinks and people respect that.


Having said all of that, why the Baathists, Pan-Arabists and secularists failed can be traced to the implosion of the Nasser revolution in Egypt. Syria and Iraq had too big of an egos with megalomaniacal leaders in Hafez Assad and Saddam Hussein to be able to provide a united front for a true Pan-Arabist secular agenda. It was because of such fascist minded leaders who put their humula (clan) before the common good that ultimately killed the Pan-Arabist movement. They didn't believe in anything but staying in power. They gave lip service to this Pan-Arabist vision.

I just wonder if we will ever see suicide bombers fighting for liberty, democracy and equality. The zeal and commitment Islamists have cannot be matched. The only way I see democracy taking root in any Arab country is to have a benign dictator rule in the model of South Korean and even Singapore. I believe a gradual shift to political reform only after economic liberation is achieved and once a strong national identity is established and implanted in the minds of the masses can a push for democracy even begin.

Democratic forces will not be able to take over any of the Arab regimes through non-violent means. The only ones willing to fight and die to purge the dictatorships and monarchs are the Islamists. It took Hamas to oust the entrenched Fatah and look at the bloodshed that followed. Democrats don't stand a chance in this rough and tough style of politics - my militia takes on your militia bullshit.

Here is a brief biography of a democrat in Syria and see the hell he had to endure. Stories such as this are common in the Arab world but you won't see it mentioned on any of the Arab channels.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riyad_al-Turk


Arab leadership failed to move their countries beyond the petty tribal reflex mindset. They remain stuck in a world order so archaic, so inefficient and so chaotic, being dysfunctional is the norm. These leaders are only good at breeding incompetencies into the system. Sadly, this dooms the fate of future generations of Arabs because the systems in place only perpetuates the inefficiencies and corruption. The current political order serves no one but the oligarchs, American oil interests and Israel.

There are two battles, one to establish secular democratic states - targeting current regimes and the other is to be truly independent of American grip. The conquer and divide strategy the Americans inherited from the imperial British and French has been preserved to date - and no measure was out of bound to maintain this Pax-Americana order - and we see the length the empire will go to maintain this control - from returning Emirs back to their thrown to removing regimes and hanging leaders who don't tow the dictates of Uncle Sam.

The only ones standing up to the empire are the Islamists. Democrats, as we saw recently in Egypt were harassed and their leaders arrested, prominent democrat was in a hunger strike in prison - similar situation as with Al Turk in Syria, but once again America is nowhere to be found on pushing for their release.

As I said, it's not just a matter of removing Abdullah or Mubarak, you have to get through the CIA protection shield and American political, financial and military might that is backing them up.

Today's Islamists are yesterday's Pan-Arabists and this shift was born out of necessity and desperation- and because no other group is challenging the status quo but the Islamist parties.

That's how the system was rigged. Mubarak will make some room for Islamists but completely shutdown democratic parties. He wants to present only two choices to the people and frighten his people with the Islamic bogeyman. The truth is, he and others like him in that region, fear democrats more than they fear Islamists.

With the Islamists being the only legitimate challenge to their power, they can continue to be as oppressive and tyrannical as they want to the point where it becomes the norm.

When you silence all the democratic voices, you insure tyranny in perpetuity.

The Islamists are offering their version of Pan-Arabism but not sure going back to 7 A.D. or returning the Calipha is the answer.

Ron Paul for President?

There is no better way to gauge the decline of a society than by looking at who gets elected to office. The people vote to determine who they want to lead them. George Bush was elected twice. The political indicators all show great decline. If you measure the decline from Washington to Jefferson, to Roosevelt and to Eisenhower - to George Dubya of today, it's a scary drop.

That's were declines begin in empires or in any nation, it starts from the top and the people we elect. You can look at economic decline, social decline and other measurements to make any argument but nothing is so crystal clear as seeing the decline from the oval office on down. Forget about zero savings, high trade and budget deficits and the talk about decline of dollar and standard of living, just look at the leadership and you will see the state of our union in perfect 3 dimensional clarity once Bush opens his mouth.


To bring it further into illumination, let's look at Ron Paul. A classic example of reality gone amuck. Here is a guy who has to defend his republican credentials to the mainstream media? His positions on taxes are more republican than any nutball running, he wants to eliminate the IRS and put in place a fair tax. That's republican values to extreme but we are told he is a fringe Libertarian, as though wanting less government, less taxes, less American entanglements abroad are not republican hallmarks but big spending, nation building and constant warring are republican values. Ron Paul is more republican and more conservative than the entire party put together.


It's absurd this debate is even going on while those republicans in power should be defending their NOT SO republican record. For the religious right morons, you can throw their way a judge here and judge there and they will be happy, but for other republicans, whether fiscal consvervatives or American firsters on trade and foreign policy, like Ron Paul and Buchanan wing or those republicans worried about immigration, this republican party has offered them nothing - in fact pursued policies completely to the detriment of all these core beliefs.


Back to Ron Paul, how this guy can be questioned of his republican credentials, marginalized and made to appear his views sit on the far fringes of the political spectrum when in fact his views are shared by the majority of the American people is a telling sign we are going the wrong way. Who wouldn't like to see IRS disappear? Who wouldn't like to see war in Iraq ended and troops home now? Who wouldn't like to see American foreign policy reflect American values? Who wouldn't like to see smaller government and more liberty?


But our society is in decline and no better way to witness this decline than to see who we elect. We continue to be fooled by these charlatans and chameleons in Washington. The media plays around with this fictionalized reality sold as news and some people don't dare to think outside of the tube box.

The day this nation elects people like Ron Paul is the day we can say this country was re-born.


Having said all of that, I don't claim to share all of Ron Paul's views but there is no denying his passion for the constitution and liberty - and I say you can't go wrong with those two in your favor.

Is the Al-Qaeda bug infecting the Palestinians?

It's no secret foreign powers and foreign groups have used the Palestinian cause to advance their own agenda. We can look back at the Abu Nidal saga, where he was paid by Syria and even Israel, to kill Palestinians who were moving towards moderation. Syria never forgave Arafat for signing Oslo and so it hired this Palestinian thug to cause him grief. This is nothing new, Hamas was formed by Israel to challenge Fatah and the cycle of outside intervention continues to this day where you have outside players, from the USA to Saudi Arabia to Damascus and to Tehran, all playing their little games of intrigue and sabotage that ALWAYS seem to have deadly and catastrophic consequences for the Palestinians.

Now it's getting interesting as Al-Qaeda has entered into this exclusive club of miscreants. The result is even more frightening as Islamic extremism takes over Palestinian nationalism.

As a Christian Palestinian, it's obviously a more dangerous situation for us if Sharia mania continues to spread beyond Gaza--as evidence suggest it has. We saw churches and video stores in Gaza attacked and internet cafe's in Ramallah threatened all in the name of "Islam". There are also reports from Nablus a group of Islamists are demanding "Christians convert" or else.

This is clearly a new phenomenon for Palestinians who for the most part embraced secularism and democracy. We are seeing the reverberation of the Iraq war on our doorsteps as this region has become more radicalized. The Islamic extremists here don't want to distinguish or unable to distinguish or for whatever reason, can't distinguish between the "crusaders" and the "infidels" who are behind the Iraq war and the Christians within their midst. Bush has made life for Christians, whether in Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Palestine or Syria much more difficult, if not impossible in some parts.

Bush has proven Al-Qaeda claims and assertions that the war on Iraq was not about WMD or liberation but an attack on Islam and Muslims in general. I cannot stress the significance of such a blunder where Osama is left alone in Afghanistan while Arabs die by the hands of Christian Americans in Iraq. This became the perfect recruiting bait for jihadists worldwide. Now Palestinians are being recruited and sadly, for the first time ever, are showing signs of placing a strict religious doctrine above their national interests.

The abduction of the BBC reporter is another example. Here the demands of the abductors have no national interest component. They are demanding the release of "Muslims" held in British jails - and in particular demanding the release of Sheik Abu Qatada.

We see today in Lebanon the spread of this cancer where a new group emerged called Fatah Al-Islam. It wants to bring Sharia Law to Palestinian refugee camps. It's not like they don't have enough problems to deal with living in these ungodly hell holes but now a tide of Islamic extremism is only making life more hellish for these people.


"May 20 (Reuters) - At least seven soldiers and four gunmen were killed in fighting on Sunday pitting the Lebanese army against militants from Fatah al-Islam group in northern Lebanon.

Here are some facts about Fatah al-Islam:

- The faction emerged in November when it split from Fatah al-Intifada (Fatah Uprising), a Syrian-backed Palestinian group. Fatah al-Islam had some 200 fighters at the time, based in Nahr al-Bared camp. Security sources have said militants from other Palestinian camps have joined the group since then and have been trained at the camp.

- The Lebanese government links Fatah al-Islam to Syrian intelligence. Syria and Fatah al-Islam deny any links to each other. The government says four Syrian members of Fatah al-Islam confessed to bombing two buses in February in a Christian area near Beirut. Three people were killed in the attacks.

- Fatah al-Islam's leader, Shaker al-Abssi, is a veteran Palestinian guerrilla. He was sentenced to death in Jordan for killing a U.S. diplomat in 2002. The slain leader of al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab Zarqawi, received a similar sentence for the same crime.

- Abssi says his group has no organisational links to al Qaeda but agrees with its aim of fighting infidels. Fatah al-Islam statements have appeared on Islamist Web sites known to publish al Qaeda statements.

- Abssi told Reuters in March that his group's main mission was to reform the Palestinian refugee community in Lebanon according to Islamic sharia law before confronting Israel."


That's just great, let's just go back to 7 a.d before we can deal with matters of 2007?

It doesn't look good and Bush has unleashed something I fear will take another generation or two to overcome. Bush has allowed Al-Qaeda to franchise out. It is sad to think before the invasion into Iraq, there was no Al-Qaeda under Saddam's reign. Now it's spread beyond Iraq and throughout the region thanks to the brilliant "decider" in the White House.

Falwell is dead- a good day for sanity!

I think the Christian Zionist movement is a clear and present danger. I'm glad to see someone make mention of this fact and point the finger where it rightfully belongs. Jerry Falwell's legacy is accurately being told by Christopher Hitchens. Here is Hitchen's on CNN telling it like it is. I lost respect for Hitchens when he shifted sides and supported the neocon agenda in Iraq but on the issue of religion, Falwell and Israeli occupation, he is dead on.

It's hard to phathom this truism, that Christian Zionists are more Zionists than Jewish Zionists, but it's absolutely true. Christian Zionism dates back 400 years. Jewish Zionism is only 100 years old. This marriage of convenience between the two is a interesting one to observe. Jews and Christians have different agendas for Israel but what is clear, both are in agreement the Palestinians, be they Christians or Muslims, must be eradicated from Palestine(Israel).

The end game for Christians is the end of times and second coming of Christ. It's too bad Falwell will miss the rapture but let's hope he won't miss his judgment day in hell.

Death by a million pieces

It seems Palestinian fratricide binge will continue. A very tragic turn of events but not surprising when you consider how Israel and America have been shaping events in the region for so many years. In Iraq, we see clearly the aims of America ( a Zionist occupied territory). The decimation of Iraq is as blatant as it gets but yet you still have individuals deny the obvious. In Lebanon, the same thing happened, Israel bombed the place to oblivion and with the help of America, working covertly to create a civil war there. The Seniora government was installed by America and it continues to fully fund and support their puppet regime. In Palestine, the same divide and conquer strategy is in play, this time America is funding and training militias that support and are to defend Abbas - their guy, and so it was only a matter of time before the situation was going to explode in the matter it did with Palestinians killing Palestinians. The ecomomic sanctions are part of the problem as well. They were put in place to punish the people for voting in Hamas.

Who said democracy isn't a good thing, just make sure American and Israeli dictates are followed and people elect those ZOG wants elected.
If one follows that simple rule, a good chance one will live to see another day.



As for the factional fighting in Gaza, it could only get worse. I think too many red lines were crossed making it difficult to impossible - for the short term - to have true unity. I just think Fatah has not gotten over the fact they lost power to Hamas in a fair election.

There was a reason why Arafat refused early elections, rejected elections in Gaza entirely. He knew full well support for Hamas was great and they could win. That was precisely why for so long he refused to have elections in Gaza.

As for current events, I fear the worse is yet to come. All it takes is an assassination of one or more prominent Hamas or Fatah leaders by either side to escalate the hostility to an all out civil war. Israeli will be looking for ways to capitalize on this situation, so it wouldn't surprise me to learn Mossad will light the fuse on this tinder box with the assassination of someone prominent-- and make it look like it came from one or the other side.

The solution must include international troops on Israel and Gaza border. This is something Israel has rejected in years past. Israel accepts international troops on Sinia Egyptian border with Israel, with Lebanon border with Israel, but continues to reject international troop presence in Gaza or the West Bank, for fear it's claim on territory would be dimished. That's the bottomline regarding Israeli rejection. In fact, Israel has yet to acknowledge Gaza, West Bank and East Jerusalem, are occupied territories.