LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS
BULLETIN
June 30/08
Bible Reading of the day.
Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ according to
Saint Matthew 16,13-19. When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he
asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"They replied,
"Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the
prophets."He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter said in
reply, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."Jesus said to him in
reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not
revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the
netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the
kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and
whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Free
Opinions, Releases, letters & Special Reports
U.S. escalating
covert operations against Iran: report -Reuters
29/06/08
Beyond the Government.By:Walid Choucair
Dar Al-Hayat 29.06.08
Who's Planning Our Next War.By: Pat Buchanan 29/06/08
Another Israel-Hezbollah Prisoner
Swap? By: P. David Hornik. FrontPage 29/08
The Kurds, Israel, and the Future
of Syria.By: Joseph Puder. FrontPage
29/06/08
Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for June
29/08
Olmert: Captive Israeli soldiers in Lebanon dead-The
Associated Press
Moussa: Mines Push Lebanon to Red Lines-Naharnet
Israeli cabinet weigh Hezbollah prisoner swap-AFP
Tension runs high in northern Lebanon-AFP
Preferring Hamas and Hezbollah-Ha'aretz
Nicola:
March 14 Suffers from 'Aoun Complex'-Naharnet
Hassan
Khalil Ready to Facilitate Efforts to Form Cabinet-Naharnet
Hizbullah Denies Deploying
Gunmen in Sannine Mount-Naharnet
Iran Waves Hizbullah Stick
in Israel's Face-Naharnet
Suleiman Hopeful Cabinet
Will Be Announced in 48 Hours-Naharnet
Ex-spy Chief: Israel Has a
Year to Destroy Iran's Nuclear Program-Naharnet
Aoun Embarrasses
Opposition-Naharnet
Suleiman Hopeful New Cabinet Will Be Announced Within 48
Hours-Naharnet
Hizbullah's Raad Hopeful on New Cabinet-Naharnet
Iran Warns Israel It Could
Wreak Havoc with Hizbullah, Hamas Support-Naharnet
Israel mulls Lebanon prisoner swap
AFP/29/06/08
Israel's cabinet is debating a prisoner swap with Hezbollah, the Lebanese
opposition group with which it fought a war in 2006 following their capture.
Under the deal, Hezbollah would return what Ehud Olmert, the Israeli prime
minister, acknowledged for the the first time on Sunday, would be the bodies of
the troops. The remains would be swapped for the release of five living Lebanese
prisoners. Olmert was quoted as telling his cabinet on Sunday: "Our initial
theory was that the soldiers were alive ... Now we know with certainty there is
no chance that that is the case." The prime minister said that the exchange was
"a matter of the highest moral order". "Despite all hesitations, after weighing
the pros and the cons, I support the agreement."
German mediation
Indirect negotiations between Israel and Hezbollah have been handled by a
UN-appointed German mediator. Samir Qantar is the highest-profile Lebanese
prisoner that would be released, who is currently serving multiple life terms
for an attack on an Israeli town in 1979. In addition to Qantar, Israel is also
supposed to release four other Lebanese prisoners and the bodies of around 10
Hezbollah fighters. Hezbollah had demanded the release of hundreds of
Palestinian prisoners, but Israel said it was only willing to release between
five and 10, a senior Israeli government official said on Sunday. In parallel to
the Hezbollah talks, Olmert's government is trying, via Egypt, to recover Gilad
Shalit, a soldier captured by Hamas in Gaza around the same period. Olmert in
2006 ruled out any negotiations for the captured soldiers, launching a military
offensive in Gaza and a 34-day war in Lebanon. More than 1,200 Lebanese, mostly
civilians, died in the conflict, as well as 157 Israelis.
U.S. escalating covert operations against Iran: report
NEW YORK (Reuters) 29/06/08 - U.S. congressional leaders agreed late last year
to President George W. Bush's funding request for a major escalation of covert
operations against Iran aimed at destabilizing its leadership, according to a
report in The New Yorker magazine published online on Sunday.
The article by reporter Seymour Hersh, from the magazine's July 7 and 14 issue,
centers around a highly classified Presidential Finding signed by Bush which by
U.S. law must be made known to Democratic and Republican House and Senate
leaders and ranking members of the intelligence committees.
"The Finding was focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to
undermine the government through regime change," the article cited a person
familiar with its contents as saying, and involved "working with opposition
groups and passing money."
Hersh has written previously about possible administration plans to go to war to
stop Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons, including an April 2006 article in
the New Yorker that suggested regime change in Iran, whether by diplomatic or
military means, was Bush's ultimate goal.
Funding for the covert escalation, for which Bush requested up to $400 million,
was approved by congressional leaders, according to the article, citing current
and former military, intelligence and congressional sources.
Clandestine operations against Iran are not new. U.S. Special Operations Forces
have been conducting crossborder operations from southern Iraq since last year,
the article said.
These have included seizing members of Al Quds, the commando arm of the Iranian
Revolutionary Guard, and taking them to Iraq for interrogation, and the pursuit
of "high-value targets" in Bush's war on terrorism, who may be captured or
killed, according to the article.
But the scale and the scope of the operations in Iran, which include the Central
Intelligence Agency, have now been significantly expanded, the article said,
citing current and former officials.
Many of these activities are not specified in the new finding, and some
congressional leaders have had serious questions about their nature, it said.
Among groups inside Iran benefiting from U.S. support is the Jundallah, also
known as the Iranian People's Resistance Movement, according to former CIA
officer Robert Baer. Council on Foreign Relations analyst Vali Nasr described it
to Hersh as a vicious organization suspected of links to al Qaeda.
The article said U.S. support for the dissident groups could prompt a violent
crackdown by Iran, which could give the Bush administration a reason to
intervene.
None of the Democratic leaders in Congress would comment on the finding, the
article said. The White House, which has repeatedly denied preparing for
military action against Iran, and the CIA also declined comment.
The United States is leading international efforts to rein in Iran's suspected
effort to develop nuclear weapons, although Washington concedes Iran has the
right to develop nuclear power for civilian uses.
Olmert: Captive Soldiers Probably
Dead, Exchange Must Go Through
by Hillel Fendel -Arutz Sheva
The Cabinet is about to conclude a five-hour session and vote to approve the
proposed exchange of five Hizbullah terrorists for two abducted Israeli
soldiers. The families of the two abducted soldiers - IDF reservists Eldad Regev
and Ehud Goldwasser, who Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said are probably dead -
were invited to the end of the meeting, before the vote.
The proposed deal involves the release of five Hizbullah prisoners from Israeli
prison and ten Hizbullah corpses, for IDF reservists Eldad Regev and Ehud
Goldwasser. The two abducted soldiers have long been assumed to be dead - but
now Prime Minister Olmert has all but confirmed this.
Among the five Hizbullah prisoners is Samir Kuntar, who not only murdered three
Israelis and caused the death of a fourth - members of the Haran family and a
policeman - but is also considered Israel's final hope of ever receiving
information on captured IAF navigator Ron Arad. Arad was captured after his
plane was felled over Lebanon in 1986 and was held by various terrorist groups;
he was ultimately probably taken to Iran, and his whereabouts have been unknown
for years.
Olmert, who said before the meeting that he himself is not sure how he will
vote, took a strong position during the Cabinet session. He recommended outright
that the ministers approve the exchange, and said that Israel's information is
that the two IDF soldiers were killed during the abduction, or shortly
afterwards.
"It is a difficult dilemma," Olmert told his aides this morning, "but when I go
to the Cabinet meeting, I'll know how to vote."
On the one hand, his top aide Yoram Turbovitz opposes the deal, as do the chiefs
of the Mossad and General Security Service. On the other hand, Olmert has
promised the Goldwasser and Regev families that he would do everything he could
to return their loved ones, and diplomat Ofer Dekel has been working for months
to consummate the deal.
At the start of the meeting, Olmert said he was torn by doubts: "Even those with
the utmost responsibility, such as those in a position like mine, have the right
to have doubts and deliberate, as well as the duty to do so, because this
decision will have repercussions on our lives in the years to come... We have to
be able to look directly in the eyes of the Regev, Goldwasser, Arad, Haran and
Shalit families, as well as those of the citizens of Israel, and say that we
made the decision with a clear conscience."
The meeting will begin with a security briefing: Mossad chief Meir Dagan and
Shabak (General Security Service) head Yuval Diskin expressed their strong
objection to the deal, while IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi and
Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin support it.
"Deal Will Encourage Terrorists to Kill Abductees"
Opponents of the deal, including security experts, politicians, the ?Almagor
terrorism-victim organization and the Bereaved Parents Forum, say that a deal
for dead bodies "would encourage the terror organizations to kill their
abductees in the future, and also directly endangers Gilad Shalit who is being
held by Hamas." Shabak chief Yuval Diskin has said the same.
Shas, Labor in Favor
The Cabinet ministers are expected to approve the deal, especially now that
Olmert has come out in favor. The ministers of Shas, the Pensioners, and Labor
have said they will support it, as have some Kadima members. Defense Minister
Sha'ul Mofaz, head of the Labor Party, is among those who will raise their hand
in favor, having said, "We have a moral obligation to bring the boys home, dead
or alive." He admitted last week that the deal is "problematic."
Barak's party colleague Welfare Minister Yitzchak Herzog said he would vote for
the exchange if he does not hear "anything significantly different during the
security briefing than I have heard over the media."
Vice Premier Chaim Ramon (Kadima) said the deal is reasonable, as "receiving
Goldwasser and Regev is for sure, while receiving information on Arad is only a
maybe..."
One Cabinet minister said, "You'll notice that we have never received a live
body from Hizbullah in any prisoner exchange, except for Elchanan Tenenbaum; the
three soldiers kidnapped in 2000, and apparently the current two as well, were
returned dead."
Industry and Trade Minister Eli Yishai (Shas) actually used this information to
support the deal. He noted that back in 1996, the Netanyahu government released
45 Hizbullah prisoners and the remains of 141 Hizbullah terrorists, in exchange
for the remains of two Israeli soldiers - Yossi Fink and Rahamim Alsheikh - who
had been kidnapped by Hizbullah ten years earlier. Yishai did not mention that
17 Israel-allied South Lebanese Army prisoners were also freed by Hizbullah in
the deal.
Beilin: Against
Yossi Beilin, former leader of the left-wing Meretz party, noted that in 1998,
Israel returned 40 terrorists corpses and 60 Lebanese prisoner for the body of
Itamar Ilya, one of the 11 IDF commandos killed in a terrorist ambush in Lebanon
in September 1997. "It was a grave mistake then, and it will be a mistake to
repeat it again now," Beilin wrote.
Rabbi Ronsky Expected to Rule That They are Dead
Opponents of the deal have also demanded that the government not vote on the
exchange until IDF Chief Rabbi Avi Ronsky issues a ruling as to whether
Goldwasser and Regev can be considered dead according to Jewish Law. They noted
that it is absurd that the government does not even know whether the soldiers to
be returned are alive or dead.
Rabbi Ronsky is reportedly very close to announcing that the soldiers are, in
fact, dead.
Karnit Goldwasser, the wife of Ehud Goldwasser and currently in total limbo in
that she does not know if she is married or a widow, said, "We ask that the
ministers vote in favor of the deal, as this is the last stop in our drive to
return Udi [Ehud] and Eldad."
The Media's Role
This emotional appeal opened the popular "It's All Talk" Israel Radio morning
radio show, hosted by Yaron Dekel - who prompty accused the Maariv and Yediot
Acharonot newspapers of mounting a public campaign in favor of the deal.
Political Science Prof. Mordechai Kedar of Bar Ilan University and veteran
journalist Mati Golan agreed; Kedar said the media had "brought Israel to its
knees," and Golan added that the owners and editors lack the necessary knowledge
to take such responsibility upon themselves.
Iran Aims Shahab-3B Missiles at Dimona
by Hana Levi Julian -Arutz Sheva
Iran has aimed its Shahab-3B ballistic missiles at the State of Israel,
according to a report published Sunday in a British newspaper.
The Times of London reports that the missiles were moved on to launch pads and
are reportedly focused on several targets in the Jewish State, among them the
nuclear reactor in the Negev city of Dimona.
The Shahab-3B can be armed with a variety of different types of explosives,
including conventional high explosives and submunitions as well as chemical,
biological, radiological dispersion and, potentially, nuclear warheads. The
missile, an "enhanced" version of the Shahab rocket, is believed to have been
produced in ranges of approximately 1,300-1,500 km and 2,000 km, according to
Jane's Defence News, bring it well within range of Israel's cities.
The move came following a large-scale exercise earlier this month in which the
Israel Air Force flew en masse over the Mediterranean in an apparent rehearsal
for a threatened attack on Iran's nuclear installations.
Defense sources quoted by the newspaper said the missiles were readied for a
counterstrike should Israel attack Iran.
General Mohammad Ali Jafari, commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard which
operates the missiles, threatened over the weekend that "Iran has many different
ways to strike worldwide… and the important part of this is based on our
missiles."
Israel has repeatedly warned that Iran is preparing a nuclear weapon of mass
destruction, and has stated that it will not tolerate a threat to its existence.
Shabtai Shavit, the former director of Israel's international intelligence
agency, the Mossad, said in an interview with the British Telegraph newspaper
published Sunday that the window of opportunity to stop Iran from acquiring a
nuclear weapon is rapidly closing.
The intelligence chief estimated that the Islamic Republic would achieve its
goal of developing such a weapon within "somewhere around a year."
He added that the sooner Israel made plans for that probability, the better off
the Jewish State would be. "As an intelligence officer working with the
worst-case scenario, I can tell you we should be prepared," he said. "We should
do whatever necessary on the defensive side, on the offensive side, on the
public opinion side for the West, in case sanctions don't work. What's left is a
military action."
Shavit said it would be preferable to have American support for a strike on
Iran, if Israel is forced to fall back on that option, but predicted that US
presidential elections might eliminate that possibility.
"If (Republican candidate John) McCain gets elected, he could really easily make
a decision to go for it. If it's Obama: no. My prediction is that he won't go
for it, at least not in his first term in the White House," said, Shavit.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has vowed numerous times over the past two
years that he intends to annihilate the State of Israel. He has referred to the
Jewish State as a "malignant cancerous growth," which he has repeatedly said he
intends to "wipe off the map."
Moussa: Mines Push Lebanon to Red Lines
Naharnet/As efforts to form the new cabinet appeared stalled, Arab League
Secretary General Amr Moussa sounded the alarm, saying Lebanon is nearing the
red lines. "Mines are being planted in Lebanon …in extremely dangerous
circumstances," Moussa told the pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat.
"In deed, we are nearing the red lines" in Lebanon, Moussa warned. "A settlement
should emerge from within Lebanon. We wait to find out how would Lebanese
politicians deal with efforts to form the cabinet," Moussa added. Moussa's
remarks followed reports that efforts to form the new cabinet have been frozen
following rejection by Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun of a
settlement proposed by Hizbullah and accepted by the majority.
Premier-designate Fouad Saniora on Saturday held telephone discussions with
President Michel Suleiman and Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that focused on
efforts to form the cabinet, which have not achieved a breakthrough. The daily
An Nahar quoted Berri as emphasizing on the need to calm down and defuse
tension.
"We need to calm down the atmosphere and allow cold-headed people" to tackle the
issue.
"Things cannot proceed this way," Berri stressed. Meanwhile, Free Patriotic
Movement official Gibran Bassil said the group is "withdrawing the concession it
recently made and in which we accepted two basic portfolios and the seat of
deputy premier." "We want a sovereign portfolio," Bassil told An Nahar.
The publication quoted FPM sources as saying the group wants the finance
portfolio in addition to the ministries of public works and social affairs as
well as the seat of deputy premier. President Suleiman told visiting diplomats
on Saturday that failing to form the new cabinet is "not justified."Suleiman
said all factions should facilitate the effort and whoever blocks the cabinet
formation is "committing a big mistake against the nation and the people."
"The Lebanese people are for stability," Suleiman stressed. Beirut, 29 Jun 08,
08:09
Nicola: March 14 Suffers from 'Aoun Complex'
Naharnet/MP Nabil Nicola of the Change and Reform Bloc on Sunday
accused the March 14 majority of blocking the formation of a new cabinet upon
instructions from the United States. Nicola, in a radio interview, said U.S.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, her assistant David Welch and Senior U.S.
diplomat in Lebanon Michele Sison were directly involved in instructing March 14
leaders and Premier-designate Fouad Saniora. He said his bloc has facilitated
President Michel Suleiman's election and "accepted" the designation of Saniora
to form the new cabinet "despite all the reservations on his performance since
1992." Nicola said the majority suffers from the "Aoun complex" in reference to
Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun. Beirut, 29 Jun 08, 11:48
Hassan Khalil Ready to Facilitate Efforts to Form Cabinet
Naharnet/MP Ali Hassan Khalil on Sunday called for speeding efforts to form a
new cabinet pledging that Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri's AMAL Movement is
prepared to facilitate the mission. Khalil, addressing a rally in the southern
town of Nabatiyeh, said a chance remains available to form the cabinet despite
blocking attempts that persisted in the past two days. "Blaming each other (for
blocking the cabinet formation) does not serve anybody's interests," Khalil
stressed.
Beirut, 29 Jun 08, 11:29
Hizbullah Denies Deploying Gunmen in Sannine Mount
Hizbullah on Sunday denied reports about deployment of its gunmen in the Sannine
mountain, terming them lies. A statement released by Hizbullah's media office
said the March 14 "forces have adopted a policy of lie, lie and lie until people
believe you." Claims by March 14 leaders "about Hizbullah maintaining armed
outposts in the Sannine highland are baseless," the statement said. Beirut, 29
Jun 08, 11:17
Iran Waves Hizbullah Stick in
Israel's Face
Naharnet/Iran has threatened to block oil shipments through the
strategic Hormuz Straits if attacked and pledged that Hizbullah could also
respond by rocketing Israel. The threat was made by commander of the
Revolutionary Guards Corps Mohammed Ali Jafari in remarks to a conservative
Iranian newspaper and republished by the pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat. Jafari
also warned "regional states" against facilitating a strike targeting Iran's
nuclear facilities and pledged "revenge." After blocking the Hormuz Straits "oil
prices would hike and this would deter the enemy," Jafari said. "Iran's allies
in the region, including Lebanon's Hizbullah, could respond (to the strike on
Iran)," he declared. "The Israelis realize that if they launch a military attack
against Iran then capabilities of the Islamic world, especially the Shiites in
the region, would launch lethal strikes," he said. "Israel is within the range
of Iranian rockets," he added. Beirut, 29 Jun 08, 09:04
Ex-spy Chief: Israel Has a Year to Destroy Iran's Nuclear
Program
Naharnet/Israel has one year to destroy Iran's nuclear program or
it faces the risk of coming under nuclear attack, the former head of its foreign
intelligence agency said in an interview published Sunday. Speaking to the
Sunday Telegraph, Shabtai Shavit said the "worst-case scenario" was that Tehran
would have a nuclear weapon within "somewhere around a year." "The time that is
left to be ready is getting shorter all the time," he was quoted as saying by
the weekly.
"As an intelligence officer working with the worst-case scenario, I can tell you
we should be prepared. We should do whatever necessary on the defensive side, on
the offensive side, on the public opinion side for the West, in case sanctions
don't work. What's left is a military action."
The chief of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards General Mohammad Ali Jafari
warned Israel not to attack it, saying that the Jewish state was well within
range of its missiles, according to a newspaper report Saturday. Shavit also
waded into the American presidential race between Republican John McCain and
Democrat Barack Obama, saying that the latter was less likely to approve an
Israeli military strike against Iran. "If McCain gets elected, he could really
easily make a decision to go for it," Shavit was quoted as saying. "If it's
Obama: no. My prediction is that he won't go for it, at least not in his first
term in the White House."
He warned, however, that American approval was not a necessary pre-requisite for
Israel carrying out an air strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.
"When it comes to decisions that have to do with our national security and our
own survival, at best we may update the Americans that we are intending or
planning or going to do something," he said. "It's not a precondition, [getting]
an American agreement."(AFP) Beirut, 29 Jun 08, 05:15
Aoun Embarrasses Opposition
Naharnet/Opposition media outlets reported Saturday that Free Patriotic Movement
leader Michel Aoun has embarrassed Hizbullah and AMAL movement by rejecting a
proposal they had sponsored to facilitate efforts aimed at forming the new
cabinet. Al-Akhbar newspaper headlined its main report: "Aoun embarrasses the
opposition by insisting on the public works and telecommunications portfolios."
"Saniora halts negotiations, Murr-Geagea threaten to withdraw," the headline
added. "Is the problem now within the opposition …?" the report asked. It said
the proposal was originally declared by Hizbullah MP Hassan Fadlallah, and
relayed by a Hizbullah delegation to President Michel Suleiman backed by
"guarantees" that Aoun would accept it. The proposal, which gave Aoun the right
to choose a minister for the public works portfolio, was also relayed by
Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to the March 14 majority alliance through
Democratic Gathering Leader Walid Jumblat. Aoun, however, informed a
representative of Premier-designate Fouad Saniora that he also wants to control
the telecommunications portfolio, in addition to other seats in the cabinet, and
practiced veto on seats to be allotted to other Christian factions. Al-Akhbar
said unnamed government sources blamed blocking the cabinet formation on Aoun.
Hizbullah and AMAL, according to the newspaper, kept a low profile and avoided
comment on the issue to avoid further embarrassment. Aoun declared Friday
evening that he was officially informed by a Saniora representative that the
offer relayed to him earlier has been "withdrawn." Beirut, 28 Jun 08, 10:01
Suleiman Hopeful New Cabinet Will Be Announced
Within 48 Hours
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman said Saturday he was hopeful that a new
cabinet will be announced within 48 hours.
"There is no excuse for not forming a national unity government, particularly
after the agreement we reached in Doha," Suleiman told the diplomatic corps.
"It is important that the cabinet is set up within the next 48 hours," Suleiman
stressed.
He called on the various political leaders to facilitate formation of the new
cabinet.
"He who doesn't facilitate (the cabinet formation) would be committing a grave
mistake," Suleiman said," adding that "our internal problems are not that
important compared to our main problem with the Israeli enemy." Beirut, 28 Jun
08, 18:49
Iran Warns Israel It Could
Wreak Havoc with Hizbullah, Hamas Support
Naharnet/The chief of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards has issued a new warning
against Israel not to attack it, saying the Jewish state is well within range of
its missiles, a newspaper reported on Saturday. "This country (Israel) is
completely within the range of the Islamic republic's missiles. Our missile
power and capability are such that the Zionist regime -- despite all its
abilities -- cannot confront it," General Mohammad Ali Jafari told the
conservative daily Jam-e Jam.
"There is the possibility that by attacking Iranian nuclear sites the enemy
wants to delay our nuclear activities, but any interruption would be very short
since Iranian scientific ability is different from that of Syria and Iraq."His
comments came after U.S. media reported that more than 100 Israeli warplanes
staged a training exercise with Greece earlier this month to prepare for a
possible long-distance strike and as a warning to Tehran.
Iran has defied U.N. sanctions and international demands by pressing ahead with
its disputed uranium enrichment programme, which both Washington and Israel fear
would be used to build a nuclear weapon.Tehran denies wanting the bomb, and says
its nuclear ambitions extend only to generating electricity for a growing
population. Parliamentary speaker Ali Larijani, formerly Iran's chief nuclear
negotiator, weighed in on Saturday and said the country was ready for anything.
"Iran is always ready for any kind of action," Larijani was quoted as saying by
the semi-official Fars news agency.
Israeli Infrastructure Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, a former defense chief,
said in an interview published in the Russian press on Wednesday that Iran would
be "annihilated" if it tried to attack Israel. But, he said, "we are not
planning any attack against Iran." Last Sunday Iran's defense minister dismissed
the reports that Israel had conducted a dry run for air strikes against its
nuclear drive as "psychological operations," but warned of a limitless response
to an attack.
"Iran will not begin any conflict but will punish any aggressor with force. With
determination and using all the options -- without limit in time and space -- we
will give a destructive response to any hostile action," Mostafa Mohammad Najar
said. General Jafari also warned that Iran could wreak havoc with the support of
anti-Israeli militant groups Hamas and Hizbullah. "Revolutionary Muslims,
whether Shiite or Sunni, see the U.S. and Israel attack against Islamic Iran as
an attack on the Islamic world and thus defense will be on their mind without a
doubt," he told the daily. Iran maintains that its support for Hamas and
Hizbullah is moral and has repeatedly denied supplying them with arms. Israel
and the United States consider both to be terrorist groups.
Iran, number two in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC),
has said that using oil as weapon is not on its agenda -- but has also not ruled
it out."It is natural that when a country is attacked it uses all of its
capabilities against the enemy, and definitely our control of the Persian Gulf
and the Strait of Hormuz would be one of our actions," Jafari said. The strait
is a vital conduit for energy supplies, with about 20-25 percent of the world's
crude oil from Gulf oil producers passing through the waterway. "Certainly if
there is fighting... the scope will be extended to oil, meaning its price will
increase drastically. This will deter our enemies from taking action against
Iran."(AFP) Beirut, 28 Jun 08, 16:08
Beyond the Government
Walid Choucair
Al-Hayat - 29/06/08//
There is more to the delay in the formation of the national unity cabinet than
domestic Lebanese factors even when these factors cannot be understated. After
all, the roots and developments of the Lebanese crisis are regional in nature
even when the mechanism of its eruption and its fuel are Lebanese, especially as
long as the mosaic of the Lebanese fabric and the contradictions of its sects
and their disputes continue to provide the necessary cover for the goals and
intentions of regional escalation. The Lebanese are experts at creating the
noise and clatter that conceals the more serious causes of their tense disputes.
In fact, a few local players are much more inclined to slip into playing this
role, unaware of the "service" they are doing to foreign sides….whereas at the
same time, there are other players who are very aware of their own role in the
regional sense and with respect to the function they are performing.
Regional players with the capacity to obstruct and delay are accustomed to hold
this country by the neck and grasp the steps that become urgent and essential
needs for other international and regional players. This is what they did with
respect to opening the parliament, facilitating the work of the state and
government, and electing a president to the republic. This also was the case
with the process of forming the cabinet since the appointment of Prime Minister
Fouad Siniora.
Whether the new cabinet is formed sooner or later, the indicators over the past
four weeks since the appointment of Siniora reveal that the coming phase for
Lebanon will be of a security nature despite the Doha Accord which supposedly
brought an end to the military clashes in Beirut, the mountain and north last
May. It is a security stage not only because of the ongoing mobile clashes in
the capital, Bekaa and north, but also as a result of the declared position by
the fundamental and powerful player that possesses the security and military
initiative in Lebanon, namely Hezbollah. Hezbollah preempted the formation of
the cabinet by asserting that no one distrusted by the resistance will be
appointed as head to any security apparatus or military position.
In fact, Hezbollah's leaders addressed Saudi Arabia harshly when they announced
that "next time" (implying the next round of clashes in Beirut), "they would not
find a way out" (to leave Beirut in reference to the departure of Saudi
ambassador Dr. Abdul-Aziz Khoja during the clashes last May). Hence, the
manifestations of the next round seen in the alleys and other areas are not only
indicative of the security stage. Given the dispute over the formation of the
cabinet, Hezbollah and the opposition's circles continuously reiterate that the
majority has not learned its lesson well and that there is a need to repeat the
beating they were subjected to last May because experience has shown that just
as they agreed to give the obstructive third to the opposition and amend the
electoral law under pressure, they would only give in to the demands of the
opposition in the cabinet under renewed pressure. The implication here is
military pressure. The more pleasant expressions used by the opposition and
Hezbollah is that they will not let the majority rest and relax.
While this kind of atmosphere prevailing within the opposition, its implications
do not end at turning against the commitment in the Doha Accord not to use arms
in internal disputes. Rather, it implies that the direction of events is to
confirm the presence of a victor and a vanquished in the upcoming internal
formula. It also indicates that the regional equation that produced the Doha
Accord has ceased to exist, and this is what all this is about.
It is no longer a secret that the Iranian-Saudi relationship is falling apart,
that attempts to bridge the gap that worsened following the military expansion
of Hezbollah and the allies of Iran and Syria in Beirut have failed, and that
the meeting of Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saudi al-Faisal with his Iranian
counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki in Beirut in Beirut on 25 May ended with
disagreement. The former accuses Tehran of instigating a sectarian war while the
latter denies and promises that the events will not be repeated although he
pointed the accusations back at the Kingdom.
Tehran is concerned that Saudi Arabia may not play an ameliorating role toward
the western position over Iran's nuclear file on the basis of its fixed position
which advises the West not to resort to a military confrontation with Iran
because its outcomes would be disastrous for the region. These concerns and
fears worsened as Riyadh sought to raise the ceiling of oil production to bring
oil prices under control and stop the price hike in concurrence with the
decision by the EU and the US to impose a new basket of sanctions on Iran. In
short, Tehran wants Riyadh to come to it after the events that had taken place
in Beirut.
On the Syrian front, all mediation efforts to revive the relationship between
Damascus and Riyadh, the last of which were the Kuwaiti and Qatari efforts, were
faced with very cold shoulders by Saudi Arabia at a time when Damascus is in
dire need to revive this relationship to continue its efforts to normalize
relations with the rest of the world. Damascus also needs the Arab
Saudi-Egyptian cover for its presidency of the Arab Summit and for its
negotiations with Israel.
A better design for the war of ideas is needed
By Walid Phares
Phares Briefs Officials and Academics in Rome
June 22, 2008
As part of his activities as a Visiting Fellow at the European Foundation for
Democracy, Dr Walid Phares delivered a lecture on the “Future of Salafi Jihadi
Terrorism” at the Italian Institute of International Affairs in Rome, Italy’s
leading strategic think tank. Dr. Phares, who was introducing his new book The
Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad, analyzed the global trends
of the Jihadist movement, focusing on the Salafi networks.
The event was attended by the Chief of Staff of the Italian Armed Forces General
Vincenzo Camporini and the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force General Stelio
Nardini. Also participated in the debate Ambassador Alessandro Minuto Rizzo,
former deputy Secretary General of NATO, Admiral Mario Rino Me from the Ministry
of Defense, Stefano Silvestri, President of the Instituto Affari Internazionali,
Carlo Jean, President of the Centro Studi Geopolitica Economica, Professor
Khaled Allam at the Center of the Islamic Countries at the University of
Trieste, Karim Mezran director of the Center of American studies, Girogio Gomel,
Director of International relations at the Banca D’Italia, Marta Dassu, Director
of the Aspen Institute of Italy, and other researchers and NGO representatives.
Phares reviewed the state of analysis on the rise of the Jihadi movement
throughout the West in general and in Europe in particular. He led a discussion
of the so-called lexicons proposed by several bureaucracies and proposed an
alternative method of conducting strategic communications in Jihadi
environments. “What is needed for European, and eventually North American,
national security is a better understanding of the penetration strategies of the
Jihadi-Salafi movements and thus a better design of the battle of ideas with
their ideologies,” said Phares. “If we give in and begin using the words their
ideologues and strategists wants us to use or do not want us to use, then we
will be defeated strategically.”
After the debate Professor Phares held a meeting at the Italian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs with Ambassador Cesare Maria Ragaglini Director General for the
Mediterranean and the Middle East and Near East Diplomat Michele Tommasi.
Roberta Bonazzi, Executive Director of the European Foundation for Democracy,
also participated in the discussion. Dr Phares reviewed the global trends of the
Terror groups in the Greater Middle East and their evolution across the
Mediterranean. Ambassador Ragaglini explained the main Italian policies
regarding Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and North Africa focusing also on the
Arab-Israeli Peace Process.
Phares interview with the Mimi Gerges radio satellite show on the Confrontation
How do we win the war against jihadists and preserve our way of life? Author and
terrorism expert Walid Phares, The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future
Jihad has written the third in a trilogy of books. He offers a multi-pronged
global strategy to defeat jihadism. Then
“The ideological factions which basically reject democracy as a concept. They’re
not shy about it. But they control the microphone. … Those freedom seeking,
liberal, democracy forces in the region simply don’t have a microphone. And when
they do have a microphone, you’re going to listen to a very different message.”
- Walid Phares.
Another Israel-Hezbollah Prisoner Swap?
By P. David Hornik
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, June 27, 2008
A lot happened in Israel this week: the Olmert government again scraping
through, at least till September, with an eleventh-hour deal between Prime
Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak; the government’s ceasefire
with Hamas already blasted by mortar and rocket firings from Gaza. At the center
of public attention, though, were three hostages of terrorist organizations and
their fate.
It was two years ago on Wednesday—June 25, 2006—that Israeli soldier Gilad
Shalit was abducted into Gaza by Hamas. On Thursday Israeli negotiator Ofer
Dekel was again in Cairo for talks on a deal for Shalit that still appears
elusive.
And it was on July 12, 2006, that Israeli reserve soldiers Eldad Regev and Ehud
Goldwasser were abducted into Lebanon by Hezbollah. In this case a deal is said
to be within reach and the Israeli cabinet is supposed to vote Sunday on a
framework agreement for a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah.
Reports vary as to the terms of the agreement. But according to what could be
called the dominant version, Israel is supposed to hand over the notorious
Lebanese terrorist Samir Kuntar, four terrorists captured during the 2006 war,
and the remains of eight others who were buried in Israel. Hezbollah is supposed
to hand over Regev and Goldwasser, whose kidnapping prompted Israel to go to war
in a failed attempt to retrieve them.
Hezbollah is also supposed to provide information on Ron Arad, the Israeli air
force navigator who was shot down in Lebanon in 1986 and whose fate has been
unknown since 1988, though it’s believed he was transferred to Iran and is most
likely dead.
If it sounds surprisingly close to a fair exchange after Israel’s past lopsided
deals with Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations, the hitch is that Regev
and Goldwasser, according to Israeli intelligence, are definitely dead.
Reportedly all three branches—the Mossad, the Shin Bet, and Military
Intelligence—reached that conclusion in separate investigations and conveyed it
to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert last June 3.
So the imbalance is there after all—especially considering that Samir Kuntar is
supposed to be part of the deal.
In 1979, in the course of a terrorist attack in the Israeli coastal town of
Nahariya, Kuntar and others took 28-year-old Israeli civilian Danny Haran and
his four-year-old daughter Einat down to the beach as hostages. There Kuntar
shot Danny Haran dead and killed Einat Haran by smashing her head on rocks and
with the butt of his rifle.
Since then Kuntar has been jailed in Israel with a life sentence. Last February
the assassination of terrorist leader Imad Mughniyeh in Damascus prompted him to
send a letter—reprinted in the Palestinian Authority daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida—to
Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah in which he wrote: “Peace be unto…Imad
Mughniyeh…. My oath and pledge is that my place will be at the battlefront…and
that I shall continue down the path, until complete victory.”
For Nasrallah, eager to shore up his newly enhanced standing in the Lebanese
political scene, freeing the child-killer is high-priority. Kuntar’s inclusion
in the prospective deal, though, has led Mossad chief Meir Dagan and Shin Bet
chief Yuval Diskin to raise objections to it. Dagan and Diskin are particularly
concerned that, after paying such a price, Hezbollah could “reciprocate” with
information on Ron Arad that’s of little worth and sheds little light.
Dagan and Diskin’s objections are reportedly what has caused Olmert to have
second thoughts and order the army’s chaplaincy corps to declare Regev and
Goldwasser KIA—killed in action—which some have interpreted as Olmert's attempt
to dampen support for the deal.
Some observations:
1. Israel has itself to blame for making the kidnapping of Israelis a key
objective of terrorist organizations. Israel’s previous severely asymmetrical
deals are infamous, not least in Israel itself; the most egregious case is the
1985 Jibril Deal in which—sparking public outrage—Israel traded 1150 terrorists
for three soldiers held by Ahmed Jibril’s PFLP. Now, reportedly, teams have been
formed to draft a new policy for such situations. Earlier the Winograd
Committee, set up to investigate the failures in the 2006 war in Lebanon, called
for an end to what it called “crazy deals.” Clearly, continuing to make such
exchanges means inviting further kidnapping attempts since Israel’s enemies have
so much to gain from them.
2. The value of retrieving the bodies of dead soldiers is very real; Israel is
dealing with ghoulish enemies who won’t hesitate to exploit families’ natural
desire for the closure afforded by a funeral and a gravesite. Trading live
terrorist prisoners for corpses, however, gives terrorists a message that they
have nothing to lose: they can kidnap the Israelis and, even if they kill them,
still reap a high price for them. Israel’s January 2004 deal with Hezbollah,
when it freed 435 terrorists in return for the shady businessman Elhanan
Tanenbaum and three corpses of soldiers, may possibly have been a death warrant
for Eldad and Goldwasser since Hezbollah had little incentive to keep them
alive.
3. The terrorist organizations’ behavior in these situations is a display of
human evil at its coldest and most sadistic. Hezbollah has kept conveying
shifting versions of the terms it will accept while refusing to disclose if
Eldad and Goldwasser are dead or alive. The terrorists use the pain of the
soldiers’ families, and the pressure they inevitably exert on the Israeli
government, as part of their arsenal. Although Shalit has been allowed to send
his parents three letters, neither he nor Eldad and Goldwasser have been seen by
a third party, visited by the Red Cross, let alone visited by a relative. Both
Hezbollah and Hamas have exploited the case of Ron Arad—vanished for twenty
years—by threatening that the current hostages’ fate will be similar if Israel
doesn’t pay the demanded prices.
For Israel it’s a disconcerting experience of staring evil in the face, but an
experience from which Israel has to learn. If it ends up paying an exorbitant
price for Shalit, or for the remains of Goldwasser and Regev plus inadequate
information on Arad, it has to make clear that this is the last time. Expecting
such clarity and resolve from Israel’s current government, however, is
excessively optimistic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. David Hornik is a freelance writer and translator living in Tel Aviv. He
blogs at http://pdavidhornik.typepad.com/. He can be reached at pdavidh2001@yahoo.com.
Who's Planning Our Next War
Pat Buchanan
Fri Jun 27, 08
Of the Axis-of-Evil nations named in his State of the Union in 2002, President
Bush has often said, "The United States will not permit the world's most
dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."
He failed with North Korea. Will he accept failure in Iran, though there is no
hard evidence Iran has an active nuclear weapons program?
William Kristol of The Weekly Standard said Sunday a U.S. attack on Iran after
the election is more likely should Barack Obama win. Presumably, Bush would
trust John McCain to keep Iran nuclear free.
Yet, to start a third war in the Middle East against a nation three times as
large as Iraq, and leave it to a new president to fight, would be a daylight
hijacking of the congressional war power and a criminally irresponsible act. For
Congress alone has the power to authorize war.
Yet Israel is even today pushing Bush into a pre-emptive war with a naked threat
to attack Iran itself should Bush refuse the cup.
In April, Israel held a five-day civil defense drill. In June, Israel sent 100
F-15s and F-16s, with refueling tankers and helicopters to pick up downed
pilots, toward Greece in a simulated attack, a dress rehearsal for war. The
planes flew 1,400 kilometers, the distance to Iran's uranium enrichment facility
at Natanz.
Ehud Olmert came home from a June meeting with Bush to tell Israelis: "We
reached agreement on the need to take care of the Iranian threat. ... I left
with a lot less question marks regarding the means, the timetable restrictions
and American resoluteness. ...
"George Bush understands the severity of the Iranian threat and the need to
vanquish it, and intends to act on the matter before the end of his term. ...
The Iranian problem requires urgent attention, and I see no reason to delay this
just because there will be a new president in the White House seven and a half
months from now."
If Bush is discussing war on Iran with Ehud Olmert, why is he not discussing it
with Congress or the nation?
On June 6, Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz threatened, "If Iran continues its
nuclear weapons program, we will attack it." The price of oil shot up 9 percent.
Is Israel bluffing — or planning to attack Iran if America balks?
Previous air strikes on the PLO command in Tunis, on the Osirak reactor in Iraq
and on the presumed nuclear reactor site in Syria last September give Israel a
high degree of credibility.
Still, attacking Iran would be no piece of cake.
Israel lacks the stealth and cruise-missile capacity to degrade Iran's air
defenses systematically and no longer has the element of surprise. Israeli
planes and pilots would likely be lost.
Israel also lacks the ability to stay over the target or conduct follow-up
strikes. The U.S. Air Force bombed Iraq for five weeks with hundreds of daily
runs in 1991 before Gen. Schwarzkopf moved.
Moreover, if Iran has achieved the capacity to enrich uranium, she has surely
moved centrifuges to parts of the country that Israel cannot reach — and can
probably replicate anything lost.
Israel would also have to over-fly Turkey, or Syria and U.S.-occupied Iraq, or
Saudi Arabia to reach Natanz. Turks, Syrians and Saudis would deny Israel
permission and might resist. For the U.S. military to let Israel over-fly Iraq
would make us an accomplice. How would that sit with the Europeans who are
supporting our sanctions on Iran and want the nuclear issue settled
diplomatically?
And who can predict with certitude how Iran would respond?
Would Iran attack Israel with rockets, inviting retaliation with Jericho and
cruise missiles from Israeli submarines? Would she close the Gulf with
suicide-boat attacks on tankers and U.S. warships?
With oil at $135 a barrel, Israeli air strikes on Iran would seem to ensure a
2,000-point drop in the Dow and a world recession.
What would Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria do? All three are now in indirect
negotiations with Israel. U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq could be made by
Iran to pay a high price in blood that could force the United States to initiate
its own air war in retaliation, and to finish a war Israel had begun. But a U.S.
war on Iran is not a decision Bush can outsource to Ehud Olmert.
Tuesday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Michael Mullins left for Israel. CBS
News cited U.S. officials as conceding the trip comes "just as the Israelis are
mounting a full court press to get the Bush administration to strike Iran's
nuclear complex."
Vice President Cheney is said to favor U.S. strikes. Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates and Mullins are said to be opposed.
Moving through Congress, powered by the Israeli lobby, is House Resolution 362,
which demands that President Bush impose a U.S. blockade of Iran, an act of war.
Is it not time the American people were consulted on the next war that is being
planned for us?
**To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators
Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at
www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.
Guest Post: Hizballah disarmed? Forget it!
http://blacksmithsoflebanon.blogspot.com/2008/06/guest-post-hizballah-disarmed-forget-it.html
Long-time reader, Lori, sends in this piece drawing out her views on how a
[satirical] interview with a Hizballah politburo member would read.
Through the voice of MP Hassan Fadlallah, Hizballah announced that even if the
problem of the Shebaa farms and the Kfar Shouba hills will be solved, that would
be solely the result of the resistance actions. And by consequence, the party
will not give up its weapons. The message is: Do you want to take our arms?
Really? If you are certain, than good luck with that, as we are resourceful
enough to find new reasons to keep them.
Assuming that Shebaa Farms and the hills are liberated in the near future.What
about Samir Kuntar? Please, don't say that what Kuntar did was appalling! He
only did his duty. A sacred one at that. The laws we humans made are not
suitable for such extraordinary characters. We operate under a different code,
dictated to us by the Faqih and given to us by God.
Nor do we abide by the borders drawn by man, for we are all one in our crusade
to bring these lands under the administration of the Jurist. After Kuntar, there
are the Palestinian brothers illegally kept in Israeli jails. Their only sin is
to have fought for the cause. If that means killing children and innocents, then
so be it. It is all in the name of the cause. I guess that we don't really have
to be very creative. There is always Palestine and Al –Quds to be liberated.
Let's make sure, that by Palestine, we mean all of it. Israel is an alien
implant in the region, and it represents all that we profoundly hate: terrorism,
imperialism, oppression and I have merely started.
Of course, our cause is the right one. You wonder, who told us that? Are you
aware that our party's name in Arabic means the Party of God, and do you know
that our slogan is a verse of the Holy Qu'ran? God promised that we'd be
victorious. If we doubt God's word what else stands?
Did you know that we have a new President? What do you mean who he is?! What
planet do you live on? Our President is General Michel Sleiman. We proposed him
thinking that March 14 will never agree. We worked well with him, when our
brothers, the Syrians, were in Lebanon.
Why do you ask if we are willing to give him a chance? In theory, we are, but
just in case, we let Michel Aoun dispute the role Sleiman wants to play. It is
actually hilarious to see how easy to manipulate ambitious men is.
We truly respect Michel Aoun. Years ago, before MoU, when he was in exile, in
France, he said we are terrorists. We convinced him otherwise when he returned
home. Aoun helped us a lot. We will not disregard his wishes regarding the
government posts.
Truth be told, we avoided proposing and supporting his candidacy as President.
You see, we trust our Christian allies, but you can never be too careful. What
if he'd go back to his previous ideas? We could not afford the risk, therefore
we helped him, but without going the extra mile.
I was waiting for your question on our dearest brother, Imad Mugnyeh. Mugnyeh
was among the best we have had. He was almost from the very beginning with a
foot in Hizballah and the other in Iranian military. His genius was renowned
worldwide, but you know that. I am not in the position to talk of Syrian
involvement, but we know that those who killed him, prepared with weeks in
advance the car, waiting for Mugnyeh to come. You know, there was a time when
Syria preferred Amal and hunted us like we were fugitives or something, but
praise be God that is behind us now. In any case, we have conducted our own
investigation and our Iranian brothers helped us a lot with it. The truth will
be revealed, and the perpetrators punished. Would we take it as an excuse to
attack Israeli interests in the world? We don't need excuses. We base our
actions on facts and truth, and the truth is that Israel's hands have to be cut,
sooner rather than later.
My opinion of Fuad Siniora? In 2006, he and all the other leaders, be they
Christians, Sunni, or Druze, all supported the resistance. Then it was issued
the cabinet statement – bayan wizari in our support. We never quite understood
the schizophrenic nature of some. We even talked among ourselves about it. Not
to gossip, no, but this double speak can be a sign of a poor medical condition.
That worries us.
On one hand, they hugged, kissed us and wished us all, on the other hand they
said they support the UN 1559, UN 1701 that presumably ask our disarmament. I
say presumably, because we don't consider ourselves to be a militia, and as
such, the resolutions can't possibly talk about the resistance, although those
that call themselves March 14 refer to us, as to a militia, when they talk with
US.
Why do you ask if they are afraid of us? They have no reason to fear us, and we
have shown friendship, toleration and restraint. You have to address them this
question. The events that took place recently, the peaceful, and democratic sit
in, and the fact that we have decided to put our men on the streets of Beirut,
were all acts done for the best of the country. You know that we disarmed
certain militias and handed the weapons over to the army. Why did not we hand
ours too? You have a fine sense of humour, indeed.
We have the constitutional right to say our opinion, and that is why we have
organized the sit in. Some accused us of closing downtown, but that is not the
case. Maybe some shop owners, café and restaurants patrons closed down their
businesses, but we did not order them to do so. I don't want to discuss this
subject anymore, but good has come out of it. The Shias showed their faith in
us, we respected the laws of the country, and the rules of the democratic game,
and, if in the process some had to close their businesses selling alcohol and
thus encouraging immorality, praise be God, we have done more than it was asked
of us.
We respect the army and we want to see it as strong and capable of providing for
the Resistance the support and room to maneuver it needs to fulfill its divine
mission. So long as everyone understands this, we will not have any trouble.
I know you have always wondered why we can negotiate with Israel, while Lebanon,
through Michel Sleiman and Fuad Siniora clearly reject it. You think we bullied
them into it? Such a strong language, and no, we did not. Let them take
decisions that are capable to back up.
In this world everything comes down to principles, loyalty towards a cause,
faith in God, and compassion towards the others. My message? My message is one
of peace, and in the same time, one of power. We will never again be ignored,
and we will continue our struggle. To what end? That is for God to decide, and
for us to follow.
By Blacksmith Jade at 12:01 AM
Labels: Opinion
http://blacksmithsoflebanon.blogspot.com/2008/06/guest-post-hizballah-disarmed-forget-it.html