Friday, February 26, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Abdolmalek Rigi, ringleader of the Pakistan-based terrorist group of Jundallah, was captured in an operation on Tuesday. Reports say Rigi was captured on a flight from Dubai to Kyrgyzstan. Iranian Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar told reporters that Rigi was arrested outside the country as he was preparing for a new act of sabotage. The minister added that he was consequently transferred to Iran.
Zahedan Prosecutor Mohammad Marzieh also told Fars news agency that the notorious terrorist was arrested early Tuesday in a pre-planned operation. Rigi's arrest was eventually made through a series of security measures taken for a long period of time. He is now in Iran and will be handed to security and judicial officials," he said.
The Jundallah group has claimed responsibility for numerous terrorist attacks in Iran. The group has carried out mass murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, acts of sabotage and bombings. They have targeted civilians and government officials, as well as all ranks of Iran's military.
In their latest attack, which occurred on October 18, more than 40 Iranians — among them 15 members of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), including top commanders, in addition to several tribal elders — lost their lives when Jundallah terrorists carried out an operation in the border region of Pishin, located in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan.
Citing US and Pakistani intelligence sources, the news group of an American televison network, ABC, reported in 2007 that the terrorist group "has been secretly encouraged and advised by American officials" to destabilize the government of Iran.
Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh revealed in another report in July 2008 that US Congressional leaders had secretly agreed to former President George W. Bush's USD 400 million funding request, which gave the US a free hand in arming and funding terrorist groups such as Jundallah militants.
The Pakistan-based terrorist organization denies having any link to Washington but Rigi's brother, arrested earlier and now in Iran's custody, confirmed in an interview with Press TV that the Jundallah leader had, in fact, established links with the US administration.
Abdolhamid revealed that a go-between, named Amanollh-Khan Rigi, put the terrorist group in connect with the US administration, which had promised the anti-Iran terrorist group a safe haven in Pakistan. "His name is Amanollah-Khan Rigi. He is my father's cousin. He was a royalist during the Shah's regime," Abdulhamid told Press TV. "After the  Revolution in Iran, he left the country via Pakistan and sought asylum in the United States."
Abdulhamid said the Americans had asked Amanollah-Khan to forge a link between the US and Jundallah. "The Americans asked him [Amanollah-Khan] to introduce them to [Abdolmalek] Rigi in Pakistan and that's how link was established."
He also claimed to have visited the US Embassy in Pakistan to seek more US cooperation with the terrorist group. "The most important issue that I raised was Jundallah's security in Pakistan," he said. "I told the Americans that we needed support from the media, newspapers, radios and satellite channels to get our message across to the Baluch around the world," he said.
According to Abdolhamid, the Pakistani government was well aware of the whereabouts of the Jundallah terror group. "It is impossible to believe that Pakistan is unaware of Jundallah's presence on its soil," he said. "Pakistan is a perfect haven for Jundallah.
Press TV video of a press conference by Heyder Moslehi, head of the Ministry of Intelligence and National Security of Iran (no sound in 2nd part, but very interesting subtitles):
Press TV further reports:
Iran's Intelligence Ministry says Abdolmalek Rigi, ringleader of the terrorist group Jundallah, was at a US base 24 hours before being captured by Iranian forces. Interior Minister Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar told reporters on Tuesday that Rigi was arrested outside the country as he was preparing for a new act of sabotage. He was consequently transferred to Iran.
In a news conference following Rigi's capture Tuesday, Iran's Intelligence Minister Heidar Moslehi shed light on certain details regarding Rigi's arrest as well as his links with foreign elements. Moslehi said that Americans utilized an Afghan passport for Rigi, a declaration which adds to already existing evidence on Rigi's links with the US. Moslehi said that Rigi had contacts with CIA and Mossad and had even met the NATO military chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer in Afghanistan in April 2008. According to the minister, Rigi had also contacts with certain EU countries and traveled to them.
He had been monitored for the five months immediately prior to being captured by Iranian forces, Moslehi added, reiterating that no foreign intelligence service assisted Iran in Rigi's capture. The minister said Iran reserved the right to sue the US and UK as, according to the minister, they coordinated Rigi's terrorist attacks within Iran.
The Jundallah group has claimed responsibility for numerous terrorist attacks in Iran. The group has carried out mass murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, acts of sabotage and bombings. They have targeted civilians and government officials, as well as all ranks of Iran's military
UPDATE1: Dawn.com reports that, according to an Iranian lawmaker, Rigi was, quote, "was arrested in Persian Gulf waters while he was travelling on a plane via Pakistan to an Arab country,” (...) “His plane was ordered to land, and then he was arrested after the plane was searched”. This suggests to me that his plane was intercepted not necessarily inside, but probably near, Iranian airspace. I just don't see why Rigi's pilot would have taken the risk of entering Iranian airspace, unless, of course, the pilot did not know whom he was transporting. But in the latter case, Rigi could still have ordered his pilot not to enter Iranian airspace. I will try to find out how exactly the Iranian snatched Rigi, but if you see any info about this, please let me know. Thanks!
Monday, February 22, 2010
Decisive battles between the forces of revolution and counter-revolution loom on the horizon in Venezuela.
The campaign for the September 26 National Assembly elections will be a crucial battle between the supporters of socialist President Hugo Chavez and the US-backed right-wing opposition.
But these battles, part of the class struggle between the poor majority and the capitalist elite, will be fought more in the streets than at the ballot box.
So far this year, there has been an escalation of fascist demonstrations by violent opposition student groups; the continued selective assassination of union and peasant leaders by right-wing paramilitaries; and an intensified private media campaign presenting a picture of a debilitated government in crisis — and on its way out.
Chavez warned on January 29: “If they initiate an extremely violent offensive, that obliges us to take firm action — something I do not recommend they do — our response will wipe them out.”
The comment came the day after two students were killed and 21 police suffered bullet wounds in confrontations that rocked the city of Merida.
Chavez challenged the opposition to follow the constitutional road and a recall referendum on his presidential mandate if they truly believe people no longer support him.
Under the democratic constitution adopted in 1999, a recall referendum can be called on any elected official if 20% of the electorate sign a petition calling for one.
He said if the capitalists continued down the road of confrontation, he would “accelerate the revolution”, which has declared “21st century socialism” as its goal.
The stepped-up campaign of destabilisation is part of the regional offensive launched by the opposition’s masters in Washington.
Last year, the US installed new military bases in Colombia and Panama, reactivated the US Navy Fourth Fleet to patrol Latin American waters, and helped organise a military coup that toppled the left-wing Manuel Zelaya government in Honduras.
This year, the US has occupied Haiti with 15,000 soldiers after the January 12 earthquake and US warplanes have been caught violating Venezuela’s airspace.
A February 2 report from US National Director of Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, labelled Venezuela the “leading anti-US regional force” — placing the Chavez government in Washington’s crosshairs.
A US military invasion cannot be ruled out, but the main aim of the US military build-up and provocations is to apply pressure on those sections of Venezuela’s Armed Forces, and others in the pro-Chavez camp, that would prefer to put the brakes on the revolutionary process to avoid a confrontation.
This is occurring hand-in-hand with a campaign of media lies, combining claims that Chavez’s popularity is rapidly declining with rumours of dissent in the military and government.
The US and Venezuelan elite hope to isolate and ultimately, remove Chavez.
The campaign is similar to the one unleashed in 2007 to defeat Chavez’s proposed constitutional reforms, which would have created a legal framework for greater attacks on capital to the benefit of the poor majority but were narrowly defeated in a referendum.
The opposition hopes to fracture Chavez’s support base — the poor majority and the armed forces — and win a majority in the National Assembly (with which it is likely to move to impeach Chavez).
At the very least, the opposition is seeking to stop pro-revolution forces from winning a two-thirds majority in the assembly, which would restrict the ease with which the Chavistas could pass legislation. The current assembly has a large pro-Chavez majority as a result of the opposition boycotting the 2005 poll.
The global economic crisis is hitting Venezuela harder than the government initially hoped. Problems in the electricity sector, among others, are also causing strain.
The government’s campaign to raise awareness about the effects of climate change and wasteful usage has minimised the impact of the opposition and private media campaign to blame the government for the problems in the electricity and water sectors.
Far from fulfilling right-wing predictions that falling oil prices would result in a fall of the government’s fortunes, Chavez has continued his push to redistribute wealth to the poor — and increased moves against capital and corruption.
This is occurring alongside important street mobilisations supporting the government (ignored by the international media, which gave prominent coverage to small opposition student riots).
There are new steps to increase the transfer of power to the people, such as incorporating the grassroots communal councils further into governing structures.
In November, Chavez announced interventions into eight banks found to be involved in corrupt dealings. A majority were nationalised and merged with a state bank to form the Bicentenary Bank.
Together with the Bank of Venezuela, nationalised in 2007, the state now controls 25% of the banking sector — the largest single bloc.
Nearly 30 bankers were charged and face trial over the corruption allegations. Significantly, a number of these had been closely aligned with the government.
One of them, Ricardo Fernandez Barrueco, was a relatively unknown entrepreneur in the food sector who rose up the ranks of the business elite to own four banks and 29 Venezuelan companies.
Much of this meteoric rise was due to his ties with a section of the Chavez government, which provided him with generous contracts to supply government-subsidised Mercal food stores with produce and transportation.
This earned Fernandez the nickname the “Czar of Mercal”.
The arrest of another banker over corruption allegations, Arne Chacon, led to the resignation of his brother Jessie Chacon as Chavez’s science minister.
State institutions, militants of the Chavez-led United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), and the National Guard have also moved to tackle price speculation following the January 8 decision to devalue the local currency, the bolivar.
More than 1000 shops were temporary shutdown for price speculation in the first week after the announcement.
On February 13, Chavez announced that the government had come to an agreement with French company Casino to buy out 80% of its shares in the CADA supermarket chain, which has 35 outlets across the country.
Together with the recently nationalised Exito supermarket chain and the mass importation of various essential goods, the government is moving to take up a much larger share of the retail and distribution sector.
The bolivar devaluation means imported goods have become more expensive, lowering workers’ purchasing power. To compensate, the government decreed in January a 25% increase in the minimum wage (10% to be implemented in March and 15% in September).
Government sources told Green Left Weekly it is also studying a further wage increase and steps towards establishing a state monopoly over foreign trade.
Despite the violent protests and slander campaign, a January poll by the Venezuelan Institute of Data Analysis (IVAD — generally accepted as one of Venezuela’s least biased polling companies) found more than 58% of Venezuelans continue to approve of Chavez’s presidency.
The same poll also found 41.5% believed the opposition should have a National Assembly majority, compared to 49.5% who didn’t.
Some 32.6% said they would vote for pro-revolution candidates, 20.8% for the opposition and an important 33.1% for “independents”.
That 33.1% will undoubtedly shrink by September. The question is whether this section will abstain (as in the 2007 constitutional referendum) or the revolutionary forces can organise themselves to win them over and deal a decisive blow to the right.
Three massive pro-revolution demonstrations have been held already this year, dwarfing the small, but violent, opposition protests.
A new grouping of revolutionary youth organsations, the Bicentenary National Youth Front, has also been created to organise the pro-revolution majority of youth and students.
The injection of organised youth into the revolution is vital for its future. This is needed, as Chavez noted in his February 12 speech to a mass demonstration of students in Caracas, to tackle the serious problems of reformism and bureaucratism that hamper the revolution.
Chavez has argued against those sectors of the revolutionary camp that insist it is possible to advance by strengthening the private sector and wooing capitalists. Chavez has repeatedly said the “national bourgeoisie” has no interest in advancing the process of change.
Chavez has emphasised the “class struggle” is at the heart of this process.
He said it was vital to combat the inefficiency and bureaucracy of the state structures inherited from previous governments that hold back and sabotage the process. “We have to finish off demolishing the old structures of the bourgeois state and create the new structures of the proletarian state.”
To help achieve this, the government has encouraged the creation of 184 communes across Venezuela. Communes are made up of a number of communal councils and other social organisations, bodies directly run and controlled by local communities.
Chavez has referred to the communes as the “building blocks” of the new state, in which power is intended to be progressively transferred to the organised people.
The recent creation of peasant militias, organised for self-defence by poor farmers against large landowner violence, is also important.
However, the biggest challenge is the continued construction of the PSUV, a mass party with millions of still largely passive members, as a revolutionary instrument of the masses.
In its extraordinary congress, which began in November and continues meeting on weekends until April, debates are occurring among the 772 elected delegates. Differences have arisen between those who support a more moderate reformist approach and those arguing for a revolutionary path.
An important debate is over whether to back Chavez’s call for a new international organisation to unite revolutionary forces globally to strengthen the fight for “socialism of the 21th century”.
The debates also included whether party members will elect National Assembly candidates, or whether this important decision would be left in the hands of a select committee (as more conservative forces prefered).
After the decision to hold primary elections for candidates was announced, Chavez said on February 11: “I have confidence in the people, I have confidence in the grassroots, they will not defraud us.”
Federico Fuentes is a member of the Green Left Weekly Caracas bureau.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Now take a look at the sickening bullshit the corporate media was broadcasting to the American public. Please, do watch it: only suffering through the 14 minutes of this idiotic performance will allow you to fully measure the degree of helpless imbecility in which the leaders of the USraelian Empire want to hold us all.
And once you are done this, consider what you can do to strike back at these bastards: take the following two simple steps:
1) sever ANY and ALL your exposure to the corporate media: throw away your TV (smash and burn it - it's fun) get rid of all your FM/AM radios (keep a worldwide shortband receiver and a police scanner), take a solemn vow never to hold a newspaper in your hands again, unless it is an emergency and you are out of toilet paper.
2) get ALL your info from the Internet and ONLY from the Internet. Here is a short list of some alternative news outlets:
- Pacifica radio KPFK-LA: http://sc1.mainstreamnetwork.com:9042/listen.pls
- Pacifica radio KPFA-Berkley: http://www.kpfa.org/streams/kpfa_24k.m3u
- "No lies radio": http://sc10.spacialnet.com:24594/listen.pls
- Radio4all: http://www.radio4all.net/
- Radio Indymedia: http://radio.indymedia.org/
http://www.livestation.com/channels/3-al_jazeera_english (no video)
mms://wms.edgecastcdn.net/200216/ipresstv (direct stream)
http://www.telesurtv.net/noticias/canal/senalenvivo.php (in Spanish)
Of course, none of these TV stations are to be considered The Word Of Truth (all in caps), but they are at least not controlled by the USraelien Empire and, as such, represent a valuable alternative.
And if you cannot do these two simple things, then watch the Tiger Woods press conference over and over and over again until you feel the urge to do so with relief and joy.
"By way of deception thou shalt do war"
(unofficial translation of the) Mossad motto
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it"
Gospel according to the Apostle and Evangelist Saint John the Theologian
"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time"
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Unlike some previous Mossad SNAFUs, this time the assassins did get the correct guy, and they did kill him. They even managed to leave the country without being arrested. What these pseudo-pros did not realize is that a) their faces would be identified b) their passports would be identified and c) their retinal scans would be identified. So much for their professionalism (click on the picture for a high-res picture of their mugshots). Furthermore, all their actions were caught on numerous CCTV and have been made public by the Dubai police (see video here). Lastly , since these idiots decided to take the real identities of wholly unsuspecting Israeli citizens from Europe, they have now alienated not only the rest of the planet, but even their own public opinion (read Gilad's excellent commentary about this). Today, it was announced that they were now all blacklisted (well, redlisted, technically) by Interpol. Enraged Dubai cops are now demanding that the head of the Mossad be placed on the Interpol "red list" too.
And all this for what purpose exactly?
Here is what Ha'aretz' Gideon Levy had to say about this:
Let's suppose the Dubai assassination project had worked out well. Mahmoud al-Mabhouh would have received his kiss of death, the assassins would have returned safe and sound to their bases, and no Israeli would have run into identity complications. And then? Mahmoud's place would have been taken by Mohammed, who also would have tried to kill Israeli soldiers and smuggle Iranian arms into Gaza. Perhaps the heir would even outperform his predecessor, as has happened in several previous liquidations. We eliminated Abbas al-Musawi? Well done, Israel Defense Forces. We got Hassan Nasrallah. We killed Ahmed Yassin? Well done, Shin Bet security service. We got a Hamas many times stronger. Abu Jihad was eliminated? Well done to the Sayeret Matkal special forces unit - of course, according to foreign news reports. We killed a potential partner, relatively moderate and charismatic. As a bonus, we got revenge attacks like those after "the Engineer" Yihyeh Ayash was slain. We also got the danger hovering over every Israeli and Jew in the world each anniversary of the assassination of Imad Mughniyeh, which was also blamed on Israel.He is quite correct, of course. In reality, the Israeli secret service is far from being as formidable as some think. It is technically very mediocre and strategically outright incompetent. The IDF and the Mossad (and by "Mossad" I am really referring to the whole bunch of them, Mossad, Aman, etc.) are little more than yet another example of the boundless Israeli arrogance, hubris and outright stupidity. Sure, they are skilled at organizing massacres (like the one in Gaza) and at executing Palestinian leaders, but it is a constant feature of the Israeli security establishment that each of its supposed tactical "successes" results in a strategic disaster.
I am under no illusions about the long term consequences of this latest Mossad debacle. The iron grip of the Israel Lobby on the western corporate press and political elites is such that after a little huffing and puffing it will be all forgotten, swept under the carpet. If needed, some big revelation about the "new Antisemitism" will be announced or a Holocaust event organized (like this one). All in all, this is really a "no big deal" case, at least as seen by the Israeli side. But the real consequence of this will be to further erode the perception of the Israeli power in the eyes of the world and, in particular, in the Middle-East.
Speaking about Israeli assassinations, there was one which was clearly a "success", at least in tactical terms: the murder of Imad Mughniyah in Damascus in 2008 (though in this case, the Israelis did not act alone, but with Syrian complicity). here is what Hassan Nasrallah had to say about Hezbollah's upcoming retaliation for his death:
So they thought Hezbollah would search for a modest aim and strike it and consider that a revenge for Hajj Imad Moghniyeh and the story would end there. That’s not how we act. I would like to stress for you that in the past two years we had within our reach many modest aims but we did not make use of them because it is Hajj Imad Moghniyeh whose revenge we are seeking. This is in frank words. We know the goals and consequently the timing and the place. We know which operation might achieve this goal and then we might tell the Israelis this is Hezbollah’s response to your assassination of its jihadi leader. Our choices are open. We may take our time. No one is pressing on us. Let no one begrudge us. Our enemy is alarmed. Let them remain worried every day and in every place and field and concerning all goals. But it is we who will choose the time and the place and the goal. Today on the anniversary of Hajj Imad Moghniyeh I tell you and all his family, friends and dear ones: We want a revenge as great as Imad Moghniyeh. That’s what we are searching for. We do not want revenge for the sake of revenge, but in order to defend all of our leaders, cadres and the cause which Imad Moghniyeh represents.Unlike the Israeli leaders, it is well-known that Hassan Nasrallah never makes empty threats. In this case, Hassan Nasrallah is announcing that Hezbollah will kill an Israeli official of the Cabinet or IDF command level (whether active or retired). What Hezbollah is seeking is not just a way to "get even" but to achieve a tacit agreement with the Israelis that they will not start killing off each other's leaders (something along the lines of the understanding which, say, the CIA and KGB had during the Cold War years).
Will the Israelis be smart enough to realize that the murder of Mughniyah was a major strategic blunder and that they better get a modus vivendi with Hezbollah? I don't think so. I therfore fully expect Hezbollah to deliver on their promised retaliation. Needlss to say, the Israelis will go crazy when this happens. They will probably try to kill Hassan Nasrallah or Naim Qassem, as they have so many other times in the past, and they will probably fail. But even if they succeed, this will bring them no advantage: Israeli leader fear death, Hezbollah leaders don't.
Still, Hezbollah can hardly be seen as triggering another orgy of violence like the war of 2006. And since Hezbollah is not in the business of conducting operations it cannot claim credit for (no, Hezbollah had nothing to do with the Buenos-Aires bombings), this places Hezbollah in a complicated situation: how to retaliate at a Cabinet/IDF command level without triggering a war? There are two possible solutions to this problem: a) to retaliate and wait for the next (inevitable) war to start to admit responsibility or b) to retaliate once a war is started. The former would be a departure from the usual Hezbollah practice, so I am leaning towards the latter.
Alas, we will know soon enough.
UPDATE1: for a good laugh on how the Zionist controlled corporate media spins this debacle, check out the hilarious report by Sky News about how the Mossad was framed by common criminals (I kid you not!). Great stuff really. Stay tuned for more attempts to "dis-ridicule" the Mossad dummies.
UPDATE2: Seumas Milne from The Guardian makes a very valid point: "Imagine for a moment what the reaction would be if Iranian intelligence was almost unversally believed to have assassinated a leader of one of the organisations fighting the Tehran government in a western-friendly state. Then consider how Britain, let alone the US, might respond if the killers had carried out the operation using forged or stolen passports of citizens of four European states, including Britain, with dual Iranian nationality". The guy must be an Antisemite. No doubt.
UPDATE3: who gives a f**k about the consequences of this debacle? Not Eitan Haber from Ynet, for sure. I am afraid that he is quite correct.
UPDATE4: According to Ha'aretz the Israeli Government believes that what Ha'aretz calls the "Dubai passport row" (sic) won't cause a major crisis. Why can a brazen act of international terrorism can be described as a "passport row"? Kuz its *Israel* dummy! They are the good guys, remember?
UPDATE5: The Gulf News website reports that the two Palestinian accomplices of the Mossad assassins who were arrested in Jordan and extradited to Dubai were former members of Palestinian Authority. Surprise, surprise, PA thugs acting like footsoliders for the Mossad. What else is new?
UPDATE6: AP reports that the total number of suspects is now 18. Eighteen operatives for the murder one Hamas official. Just how incompetent, not to mention cowardly, are these guys?!
UPDATE7: Israel is becoming an official "pariah state" says Gilad Atzmon. Bradley Burston agrees in Ha'aretz. This reminds me of the prophetic words of Norman Finkelstein: "At the same time, Israelis are hardened, and unless they are forced to pay a price, they are not likely to respond to moral or ethical appeals. I suppose it is like South Africa during Apartheid. When some were forced to pay the price – through sanctions, some of them turned around. You know, when you heard of South Africa in those times, your skin crawled. You might as well have been talking about Nazi Germany. People just did not want anything to do with South Africa. It just had such an ugly reputation. And, South Africans were not pleased with that". I agree with all of them. While the totally Zionised corporate media and ruling elites will continue to blindly Israel, the rest of mankind, in particular those with liberal or progressive views, is recoiling in horror and disgust at the behavior of this racist terrorist rogue colonial statelet.
UPDATE8: check out Robert Fisk's take on this story:
UPDATE9: check out Victor Ostrovsky (former Mossad) take on this story here.
UPDATE10: According to Gulf News, the hit team used a lamp to try to make the murder look like an electrocution. The paper adds that Mahmoud Al Mabhouh was not tortured since the killers only spent 22 minutes in the room. Instead, he was killed by suffocation. A total of 18 members were part of the hit team which attached a special tracking device to al Mabhouh's car to track him back to the hotel.
Speech of Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah during a ceremony marking the anniversary of the martyr leaders
I take refuge in Allah against the stoned devil. In the Name of Allah, The Compassionate, The Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, The Lord of the world. Peace be on the Seal of prophets, our Master and Prophet Abi Al Qassem Mohammad and on his chaste and pure Household, chosen companions and all prophets and messengers. Brothers and sisters! Ladies and gentlemen! Peace be upon you all and Allah's mercy and blessing.
Allah Al Mighty says in His holy Book: And those who believe in Allah and His messengers they are the Sincere and the Witnesses in the eye of their Lord; they shall have their Reward and their Light (Sura Al Hadid / Aya 19)
First, this occasion comes this year in the month of Safar and there are many painful occasions that come in this month too. I find that it is my duty to offer my condolence to the Islamic nation on the occasion of the death of the Great Prophet Mohammad Bin Abdullah (peace be upon him and his Household). This great Prophet is the Seal of prophets and the Master of messengers who was sent as a mercy for all creatures, to seal prophecy and to guide humanity until Doom’s Day.
I also offer my condolence on the occasion of the martyrdom of the grandson of the Prophet of Allah Imam Al Hassan Bin Ali (peace be upon them) and the martyrdom of the great grandson of the Prophet of Allah Imam Ali Bin Moussa Arrida (peace be upon them). Also with the sorrow reigning now in Lebanon following the Lebanese catastrophe, I renew my consolation and express my sorrow to the families of the victims of the devastated plane who have been bearing for weeks and are still bearing the pains of that catastrophe and still awaiting the bodies of the dear ones to be restored - at times incomplete due to natural elements. I also offer my condolences on the fifth anniversary of the martyrdom of Premier Rafic Hariri to his dear family especially his wife, also Premier Saed Al Hariri, all the brothers and sisters in the Future Movement and all those who adore the martyr Premier.
Brothers and sisters! After performing this obligation, I find it’s inevitable to usher to the realm of our martyr leaders. I renew our consolation to their blessed families for the loss of the dear ones. How great are the dear ones we have lost in the past stages! Still at the same time, I renew my felicitations to the families of the martyrs because those dear ones have won the greatest reward. They received the token of martyrdom which is not obtained but with he who has a great luck. Thus our martyrs – all our martyrs including our leaders – are our pride and honor as we were taught in the school of jihad and martyrdom.
Brothers and sisters! I would like first to talk for a while about our martyr leaders. Through them I will pass to the major topic and the great responsibility of the resistance in face of the challenges and threats we are confronting now. How we in Lebanon must act – from our perspective at least – with respect to these challenges and threats? This is what I would like to stress starting from the nature of the occasion. Indeed there are important internal events which deserve considering but due to the time limit I will focus in my speech on this perspective because it is more related to the occasion of the anniversary of the martyr leaders.
Going back to these leaders – Sayyed Abbass, Sheikh Ragheb and Hajj Imad and looking in their personalities, procession and conduct for common points we find that these common characteristics almost coincide: faith, piety, religiousness, devoutness, sincerity, truthfulness, loving people, being humble to people, being eager to people and having agitated emotions. With such persons we might understand how man might be pitiful and tough! How man might stand in face of the enemies of his nation and people and ravage them and how man might weep like children when viewing the limbs of martyrs in Qana Massacre among other massacres. So we might find many common points.
But I would like to stress today on one factor from which I will get started. It is the factor of youth which unite these martyr leaders. Since their youth, these brethren martyrs had early awareness regarding the cause of struggle against the Israeli enemy, Al Qods and Palestine. Since youth this awareness grew with his Eminence absented leader Imam Sayyed Moussa Assader (May Allah restore him safe and his friends). Since youth, they had the enthusiasm to be part of the responsibility, work, offering and sacrifice. Since youth they were men and not lads. They did not know the life of amusement, luxury and the life admissible to those of their age. They were men since they were children and remained men while they were lads and passed away men as martyrs. Allah Al Mighty chose to every one of them his course and way to be in his position and to play his role in the formula. Thus Sheikh Ragheb Harb was the embodiment of the public intifada. He was the symbol of challenge, civil steadfastness and the intifada of woman and children. He was the title of passive resistance as he refused to shake hands with the enemy or smile in its face besides accepting its existence. His blood established for the victory of the resistance at that time.
Sayyed Abbass Mussawi had his position in establishing the resistance, organization and jihad. He had his leading position as Secretary General and leader of the resistance party and leader of the resistance operations. He established the course found by the blood of the martyrs who passed away.
Hajj Imad was the leader of the battlefield. He was trusted on the words of the trustworthy and loyal to the blood of martyrs. He put the bullet, the bomb, the tactics, the rocket, the fighting means and battle plans into action. He was the expectations, hopes, dreams and pains of the tortured and oppressed due to occupation and aggression against this country. Every one of these brethrens passed his youth in the resistance - in all its posts whether the intellectual, mobilizing, public, field and jihadi posts and on the general and specific levels and every one of them passed away a martyr in his prime youth. At times, like you when I see their pictures, I might think they were old in age and in an advanced stage. Sheikh Ragheb Harb passed away a martyr while he was 32 years old only – a young man in his prime youth. Sayyed Abbass – the Secretary General – passed away a martyr while he was forty years old only. Hajj Imad passed away a martyr while he was 46 years old only.
I said and one of the seniors of this nation said words on the age of Hajj Imad: Truly a person like Hajj Imad lived long and lived a life full with blessings. It was an achievement in itself that Imad Moghniyeh lived 46 years. So these brethrens passed as martyrs while in their early youth.
We are before a sample of leaders who lived all their lives with awareness. As children they assumed responsibility. They filled the days of their lives with industrious and incessant work in the path of Allah and to serve their people and cause. Since their early youth, they held their blood on their palms. In their prime days they offered this pure blood to Allah for the sake of their nation and people so that people might live with honor, esteem, pride and security. These young leaders could also raise generations of young men who assumed the responsibility of the resistance and its burdens on their shoulders. They fought, passed away as martyrs, remained steadfast and made great achievements and victories. They offered for us and are still offering us with their intellect, culture, blood and memory generations of young men who represent the most important factor of power in Lebanon. These aware, responsible, serious, active, sacrifice-giving youths who are concerned with their nation, people, holy sites and honor are an essential element of strength which we own and which these martyr leaders inherited to us to confront with our present time and our future.
In every occasion and in the anniversary of the martyr leaders we assume the responsibility of preserving their achievements. These martyrs along with all martyrs from all forces and factions besides the army and the people all through these long years of sacrifice and jihad have achieved the liberation of the land and the captives. They imposed respecting Lebanon and its post in the world. They established the school and the choice which protects Lebanon truly and faithfully. The will of these martyr leaders is preserving their accomplishment which is the fruit of their lives, pains, sleeplessness, hardworking and ultimately their pure blood. The achievement which they left for us is the resistance – its essence, culture, intellect, path, choice, existence, strength and capacity to assume responsibilities. This leads us to the present time and again puts us before several questions and options. Here I move to the statue quo and the stream of threats in the recent month. Many questions are being posed again. Unfortunately, in Lebanon, we always go back to square one; we do not make use of our experiences in Lebanon as Lebanese or the experiences of the world peoples or the experiences in history. We always go back to square one and pose the same questions. Today we have the same questions of 1982, before it, and after it. The same options and choices are evoked and I do not want to go back to the very debate but to remind you of these questions and pose negating questions and not interrogating or informative questions: May US promises protect Lebanon? Now if Barak and Baydon (Now we are through with Bush and Cheney) made promises to Lebanon - don’t be afraid or worried for we will protect Lebanon - will they really do that? There is something which is linked to the authenticity of Obama’s Administration related to the settlement process; still Obama failed to stop settlement building! Can international resolutions really protect Lebanon? Did they protect it for 60 years? Can the international community protect Lebanon? Did it protect it all through these 60 years? Can this international community that is only concerned with its interests and respects the strong only protect Lebanon by being neutral? Now if we took Lebanon to being neutral, can we persuade Israel not to have aspirations in our lands and waters? Can we persuade it to return to us the Shebaa Farms and Kafar Shuba Hills and to let the Palestinian refugees return? Can being neutral persuade Israel to do that? We’ve read in today’s newspapers that Lieberman said that those who think that any settlement can make us return a meter of land are mistaken. This speech is not directed to the Palestinians and the Syrians only but also to the Lebanese. His deputy also showed up to say that the return of any Palestinian refugee to Occupied Palestine is a red line. Indeed he said the “State of Israel” and talked in a legal logic and a moral logic that prevents the return of the Palestinians. So if Lebanon took the choice of being neutral, will that enable it to restore its land and to preserve its land and water in the future and help in the return of the Palestinian refugees to their homes and homeland? Indeed the experience says no. It’s weird that in Lebanon we even argue over self-evident truth. In this universe there are natural rules and norms. In history and communities there are historic and social rules and norms. All human experiences show that the survival is for the fittest. In confronting invaders, tyrants and occupiers, history says that none protects your land, people and honor but your strength. There is no place for the weak in these equations and principles. Those who beg for protection have no place. Only the strong may impose their respect on the world and achieve their goals. Should they die, they die with their honor as martyrs. Can Lebanon be strong? Yes, we have actually proven for decades that Lebanon could be strong and was strong and today Lebanon is much stronger than ever. Lebanon is strong by means of a wonderful formula. Many say now that this is impossible in the world though such thing was possible but we will leave this debate to the dialogue table. Let’s talk about this wonderful formula. Don’t you say that Lebanon is an outstanding story and it has wonders? Well this is one of Lebanon’s wonders. Don’t you say that Lebanon amazes the world? Well, this is one of the wonders of Lebanon that amazes the world. It’s the strength formula by which we confront all the challenges: the army, the people and the resistance which was adopted by the ministerial state. Experience has proven the soundness and competence and it is our choice in confrontation. We hear about other formulas. Well, Inshallah when anyone presents a scientific, logical and convincing formula which is backed by military experts – as the issue needs specialization- at the national dialogue table we will see if they can guide us to any formula through which we may confront all the challenges and the threats.
We are today before a stream of Israeli threats. How do we deal with that? We have two words: one word on the internal Lebanese state and another word related to Israel. As to the Lebanese domestic statue quo, first it’s essential that we laud the official stances of His Excellency the President, the House Speaker, the Premier and the Army leadership as well as the stance of the overwhelming majority of the political forces and movements in Lebanon because all of these stances express rejection to these threats, do not yield to them and show national unity in face of any Israeli action against Lebanon. This must be lauded as are the efforts exerted especially by His Excellency the President and the Premier in their foreign trips in which they highlight these Israeli threats and the dangers of these threats on Lebanon and the region. This is first on the internal level because all the Lebanese people are concerned to highly respect and laud any responsible and serious speech. Second on the internal level, there is the case of offering pretexts – that means saying we do not accept the Israeli threats but demand not giving the pretext to Israel. We must try to address this issue because it is not true. This presentation has negative aspects and that is not the way we confront Israeli threats for many reasons. First when Israel wants to stage an aggression against any country it does not need pretexts.
Since 1948 till 1967 and in all its wars against Lebanon and even in July War the two captives were not a pretext for this war was prepared for in advance. Israelis themselves acknowledged that afterwards. Israel does not need a pretext to be offered by anyone and if it needed a pretext, it is able to create it. It may stage an unsuccessful assassination attempt in any place in the world and hold Hezbollah responsible and attack Lebanon, hold the Palestinian brethrens responsible and attack Gaza, or hold Syria responsible and attack Syria. God only knows. So in this perspective, let’s be frank with the people. Here I laud some officials who mentioned the history of Israeli wars in their recent televised interviews in which they said when Israel did need a pretext. What’s more dangerous or worse in such rhetoric is that it inclusively holds the resistance responsible. That means it holds in advance the resistance responsible for any Israeli aggression. There is an attempt to justify any aggression launched by Israel. Thus we are ready to discuss this notion with any party to convince it that this logic and course is wrong and does not serve our confrontation with the enemy.
Now allow me to say that what’s even more serious is what we’ve been hearing for months. There is a new rhetoric which started emerging in Lebanon in a limited and narrow place. This rhetoric says what might be summed in the following. This notion has been written in various words and expressions. Articles have been written on it and speeches, seminars and lectures have been made on it. The idea they are saying is that the very existence of the resistance – even if it did nothing whether on the borderline or in any other place - is enough reason for the Israeli enemy to wage war on Lebanon, and to deprive the enemy of the pretext to launch a war against Lebanon, the resistance and its arms should be eliminated. This is extremely dangerous national rhetoric because it above all gives Israel every reason to attack Lebanon even if the resistance did not offer pretexts as they say. So the very existence of the resistance in their viewpoint is enough reason. Unfortunately, the Israelis themselves are not saying that. So what some Lebanese are saying is not being said by some Israelis. Some extremists in Israel said this but many circles in Israel say no. This is not enough reason to launch a war on Lebanon. Still we see those in Lebanon are saying this is enough reason. Hereof I say this is very dangerous rhetoric because it absolutely justifies any Israeli aggression and holds the resistance beforehand responsible for any Israeli aggression that might be staged. Perhaps they feel annoyed because since July War until this day nothing took place on the borders for example – that’s indeed within a viewpoint which I will tackle in another occasion. So in the way they view the policy of offering pretexts it does not seem that Hezbollah will offer a pretext in the South. So they considered that the very existence of Hezbollah is a sufficient pretext for Israel to stage a war. But if we advanced a bit in the question – and this is more serious and I do not want to accuse but only pose a question - is this a call for war? At times we say this is a justification for war and so far we may say they are doubtful or wrong? But the issue must advance to the level of the following question: Is this a call for an Israeli war against Lebanon? Are we before a new 1982 circumstances? Do some see that there is no way for their dreams, expectations and projects which were volatilized lately except through an Israeli war against Lebanon again? This is the question.
Before this logic and rhetoric, what is the responsibility of the Lebanese government and authority? This is the way to the state. Will it remain silent on those who offer an absolute justification for an aggression against Lebanon and its people, land and infrastructure as the Israelis are threatening? Will it remain silent on those who there is doubt at least over their political speech – and the doubt concerns a call for war? I call for refraining from this rhetoric and logic because moving on in this rhetoric means that there is in Lebanon who waits for, bets on, justifies or summons an aggression. I believe this statue quo necessitates a response on the great national level whether the government or the public. I wrap up the internal topic saying we await a first-class official stance and a first-class public stance. There is a special and narrow state that expresses its stance and background in a way that appeals to it but there is an advanced show or national unity and this is a point of strength.
On the Israeli level – and this is the more important part of my speech for today because it is evoked in the country as a result of the threats – there are many approaches and possibilities. This has occupied the country to a very considerable degree. In brief we might wrap up the strategic statue quo now lived in Israel since the failure of July War against Lebanon and the flop of the war on Gaza: Israel has been living a dilemma since it is unable to impose peace or wage war. It is not able to impose a peace with its conditions such as not restoring Golan Heights to Syria thus they made a great complexity on that lately saying the issue needs voting in the Knesset and a public referendum and the like. That also applies on Shebaa Farms, Kafar Shuba Heights besides the occupied Palestinian territories. Well, after all the developments that took place in the last two decades, are the Israelis able to impose on the Arab governments and the Arab peoples a peace through which they do not restore the land? Are they able to impose a peace through which they do not return Al Qods and the refugees? This is over with all our respect to the Arab Peace Initiative. The Israelis are not able to impose a peace as they conceive it. Anyway today there is the crisis of the lack of peace partner on both sides of the struggle. Here they say there is no partner and there they say there is no partner. There is also the inability to launch a war. The maneuvers and exercises that have been taking place in Israel following July War and Gaza War are a normal consequence to the prompt failure which afflicted the Israeli army. The Israelis have admitted they flopped in their war against Lebanon. They specified a target which is terminating the resistance and flopped and the resistance has grown stronger as they admitted. But in what Ehud Olmert wrote and would be published in his autobiography or a summery of it is that he acknowledged also that he flopped in the war on Gaza because the target of the war on Gaza – as Olmert said – was terminating the rule of Hamas and the war on Gaza failed to terminate the rule of Hamas. Today when the Israelis want to go to war – and this is important as it influences the answer – there is a primary condition hereof which is named the absolute, definite and guaranteed victory and not possible victory. So they will not wage a war on Gaza if they do not guarantee victory and they will not wage a war on Lebanon if they do not guarantee victory. The same applies to Syria and Iran.
After July War, the aggression on Gaza, the failure, defeat and flabbiness, I do not want to play down the strength and power of Israel but I want to say that we in Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Iran and the region are also strong to the extent that Israel cannot wage war on us whenever it wants to. It is not enough for Israel to have a strong possibility of victory. This is not sufficient. This is an adventure. The Israeli army and all of Israel cannot tolerate another defeat because that would mean the beginning of the end. In my viewpoint the beginning of the end started in July War and the war on Gaza. So any new defeat might mean that Israel’s power is falling down forcibly. This is quite understood by the Israelis. I claim – and the Israelis acknowledge that – that I am among the first who follow the Israeli media, statements, analyses and conferences held by universities and academic sides in Israel and in which presidents, ministers, military leaders and senior security officers talk. In their speeches, all of these unanimously agree on this point. Israel can not go to a war without guaranteed results.
Based on this presentation of the Israeli strategic statue quo we conclude that the Israelis have a problem now in launching a war. Thus they go to developing their capacities. They seek new arms and equipments. They carry exercises and maneuvers. They have a problem of recruiting soldiers. Lately they had a problem in recruiting for the navy and they started addressing it slowly. They have problems in recruiting and self-confidence. So they need time and they are not ready. I tell you something and I tell the people in Israel who are exploited by their rulers and leaders: The Iron Dome story that they narrate on the TV is more science fiction than reality. Some senior military leaders in Israel are still questioning its feasibility. Besides it’s highly expensive but even if they took its feasibility for granted, its feasibility is very limited. Israel still needs time to address its problems related to its weapons, equipments, tactics, army and capacities.
On the other hand, its policy is to halt the power and readiness of its enemies from growing. How is it achieving that? For example Syria is growing stronger with time. Iran is growing stronger with time. Hezbollah is growing stronger with time. The Palestinian factions are growing stronger with time. As they grow stronger they go contrary to the Zionist project in the region. How are the Israelis to prevent the growth of power? They have three main means: the first means is bullying and daunting with war. If you got such and such arms we will do such and such. We will get such arms and do what appeals to you. That is if we haven’t obtained it yet. They threat Syria because they accuse it of supplying Hezbollah with arms and rockets. They threat Iran with war. They threat the Lebanese government with war. They threat with war to prevent being fully fledged and fully ready. Second they work on the security level: assassinating the essential leaderships concerned in the readiness for war. Hajj Imad Moghniyeh and martyr Mabhouh. Why this martyr in particular? Because he has a logistic role as is said in the readiness in Gaza among others. We do not want to go now to personal details. Well the enemy goes in this direction to hit the capacity to complete and develop readiness. The third option is sedition. What is mainly hindering any inter-Palestinian reconciliation is Israel and any Arab who hinders this reconciliation is consciously doing Israel a favor besides being an accomplice with Israel. See the option of sedition in Lebanon or else why would Liebermann stress the Israeli inclination which for some time has been accusing Hezbollah of assassinating Hariri. This is a clear Israeli track which started with Deirchbigle and is still carrying on with Lemonde, and Liebermann has expressed it openly. The distinctive point with Liebermann is that what’s in his mind is on his tongue. This is an important point. Let’s understand what the Israelis are saying, what they want and how do they think.
Thus we tend to this evaluation of the position: This stream of threats is almost and in general closer to a psychological war to frighten the Lebanese people and government and the resistance to prevent it from growing stronger. On the other hand, it aims at raising the moral status in the Zionist entity and raising the army and people in an attempt to convince the people, from the platform, that Israel is strong and able and here it is threatening, frightening and bullying. They need to raise their morals. We may have another approach. Israel might see in it as a prevention attempt because if we scrutinized all the Israeli statements, if not 100%, 95% of these statements are conditional: if the resistance makes such and such, we will do such and such. If the resistance acts as such, we will bomb and destroy. Indeed they do not need pretexts but this gives an impression that if they are serious in what they say they are afraid. So at least these threats present for them an important political, moral and psychological achievement. It has always been that we were threatened by Israel and we would say to Israel that if you do such and such, we will do such and such. But never was Israel frightened from the Arabs. Never did it tell them: If you do such we will do such and such. Today Israel is frightened and is saying: If you do such we will do such and such.
This is first. Second in this framework we say: Whether we approached these threats as being a psychological war, having a preventive aim or aiming at preparing for a serious war (even if we do not see this possibility at least to take place in the near future), how are we to face and counter these threats. We have a sample in the resistance and a broad line which says: We must counter that with steadfastness, strength, courage and counter threatening. This is what works with Israel. Otherwise if they saw people afraid and shaking then they will not be satisfied with threatening but will wage a war. Countering threats with threats prevents war or at least puts it off or makes the enemy hesitant. This is especially true if the threats are serious and they have evidence or some information about them and not just media talk. We have an experience. Some days ago, (Ehud) Barak showed up and spoke but even his statements were not clear and strong when he threatened Syria with war. It seems that the Syrian response was not only linked to the statements of Ehud Barak but even more to Israeli messages to Syria delivered by foreign delegations and which alluded to threats. I evaluate that the response was not a media stance but rather a response to messages delivered to Syria. When Syria received threatening messages, if has either to be frightened and express its fear and retreat and reconsider its steady stances or answer the threats with even stronger ones.
It was Syrian Foreign Minister Mr. Walid Al Mualem who answered the Israeli threats. So it is neither the Head of the Armed Forces nor the President. In general the Foreign Minister is the most diplomatic side which is concerned with diplomatic and courteous talk. So the smoothest side in whatever state which is the foreign ministry is the side which answered the Israeli threats. I believe that was intentional and not at random. They said to the Israelis that if you attacked us, all your cities will be demolished and destroyed. I am sure the Israelis were stunned by the Syrian response and I am sure the Arab governments were stunned with the Syrian response because it was not diplomatic at all. It was very open, clear and transparent. Still what was the result? Two hours later, all in Israel – Benjamin Netanyahu and Barak – showed up to disclaim what Liebermann said, and Ehud Barak started rectifying what he said before. The general atmosphere in Israel became: No our strategic aim is to make peace with Syria. This was when the Syrian foreign minister answered them. This is an example. This is not a 60-year-old story which we have to verify. All of us have seen this on the TV screens some days ago.
Now we come to Lebanon. In Lebanon we do that originally. You remember that Barak showed up to threaten Lebanon with war. He started speaking about a swift, clear and decisive victory. So the Israelis have an aim for the upcoming war which is to terminate the resistance and whatever is related to the resistance one way or another. This is the same aim of July War. It did not change. But he is saying that the next war will achieve victory and neither defeat nor failure nor relapse. This victory must be decisive. It must keep nothing of the resistance. It must be final and clear and undisputable. That means that no one in Lebanon and Syria or the world might be hesitant as to whether Israel gained victory or not. Barak then said: the air force is not enough to put a decisive end for the battle. Thus we will stage a broad land operation. He threatened with five squads and seven squads. Then we had our answer: If you stepped on our villages, hills, valleys and mountains the resistance vowed that it will destroy these squads on our territories Inshallah. Afterwards Israel retreated. In all the recent conferences we aren’t hearing anymore “Israel” talking about a decisive, swift, clear and final victory. On the contrary few days ago the Head of the Northern area said: Let’s in any upcoming war which we intend to wage put modest targets just to be able to say that we have achieved the aims of our war. So they started talking about modest aims. Barak himself a month or two months ago used an expression which I used before – I believe on the funeral of Hajj Imad or a week later. Barak exactly said: If you look at the Lebanese border you will find everything quiet, but if you raise your head a little more, you will find tens of thousands of Hezbollah fighters waylaying us. When we say we are ready to fight in every village, valley or hill, I can not deceive the Israelis because the Israelis have a great capacity to collect information. This is a truth which we must acknowledge. The spying nets in Lebanon are abundant and they are found everywhere. They are general and particular and this is made clear day after day. If you threatened the Israelis by something which they have no evidence on, they do not take this threat into consideration. Still they take a threat into consideration when they have evidence on it. Their evidence might be incomplete but they have some information pertaining to it.
So when we confronted the issue of squads and decisive and swift victory, their tone began to fade out. What remained? They set the so called “Dahiyeh Theory.” You – especially the inhabitants of Dahiyeh - must know that the word Dahiyeh entered the military lexica and military strategies. What is the “Dahiyeh Theory” which the Israelis set? This theory stipulates destroying any aim in Beirut’s southern suburb. Today I would like to say something: The Israeli Air Force can’t do more than what it did in 33 days during July War. Let no one daunt us by more.
In August 14th, 2009 Ceremony, we told them that if you hit Beirut, we’ll hit Tel Aviv. But if you want war, we do not want war. So let no one in Lebanon argue over the decision of war and peace. We do not want war – not that we are afraid or coward or weak. We rather long for war though we do not want it. So it’s not only that we do not want it, we also long for it. We told you then that when you next hit Dahiyeh we will bomb Tel Aviv. Hitting Tel Aviv made them reconsider the whole equation. In the past, you used to displace some northern settlements. But now you are displacing Tel Aviv. Do you know what does displacing Tel Aviv mean? The real Israeli population is in the coastal line stretching from Haifa to the south of Tel Aviv. Its width is 10 and at some places 15 kilometers. It might be the broadest when we reach Al Qods where there is a very great population. There are the bulk of the population, the oil refineries, the great industries, the state institutions and everything. Here I have an additional detail. They might think that when we say if you hit Dahiyeh we will hit Tel Aviv that if they destroy the buildings in Dahiyeh we might barely puncture building walls in Tel Aviv. This might come across their minds. Here I am telling them, today: No, if you destroyed a building in Dahiyeh, we will destroy buildings in Tel Aviv. This is our response to the Dahiyeh Theory.
When Israel found that nothing can demoralize the resistance (They would say we will wipe you and the resistance answers I am looking forward for you. They would say we will destroy you and the resistance says we will destroy you too), they went to threatening the Lebanese government and people by destroying the infrastructure. Here we have something new. (Indeed that would not be the end. There must always be surprises). So they said in case of war we will destroy Lebanon’s infrastructure. But just as we have infrastructure, there is infrastructure in occupied Palestine too. We have one airport, and they have airports and seaports. We have a few power stations, and they have huge power stations. We have a humble number of either out of order or barely functional oil refineries, while they have a considerable number of oil refineries. We have some factories, and they have gigantic industrial cities. So the Israeli infrastructure is much bigger and much more important than ours. There was a report for the Israeli television aired during July War on the extent to which the cabinet and the internal front was preoccupied when power was off in one the middle Israeli cities. Well the infrastructure is much more important there and power is always available while the power goes off here.
Here I tell them today and they may verify what I will say because it stands for another degree of capacities. (I will not give names but rather leave names for another occasion). Here I am telling the Israelis today: If you hit Dahiyeh, we will hit Tel Aviv. If you strike martyr Rafic Hariri’s International Airport in Beirut, we’ll strike your Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv. If you hit our ports, we will hit your ports. If you attack our refineries, we’ll attack your refineries. If you bomb our factories, we’ll bomb your factories. If you strike our power stations we will strike your power stations.
Today, on the anniversary of Sayyed Abbass, Sheikh Ragheb and Hajj Imad I announce and accept this challenge. We in Lebanon as people, army, and resistance, are capable forcefully of protecting our country and we do not need anyone in this world to do this for us. This is how we face threats… with counter threats and not with retreat, fear and hiding away. We rather face them with steadfastness, readiness and threats as well. Here I say again we do not want war. We have never sought war. We are a resistance which used to fight to liberate the land and captives. We never wanted to go to war but we are concerned with defending our country, standing firm in our land and preserving the dignity of our people and nation.
Brothers and sisters! One thing remains to say on the anniversary of the martyr leaders. It is concerning taking revenge for Hajj Imad Moghniyeh. I frankly tell you: some Israelis wish that Hezbollah will make something to content themselves with. Hezbollah would search for a modest aim – I will not clarify what I mean with a modest aim so that they remain worried. So they thought Hezbollah would search for a modest aim and strike it and consider that a revenge for Hajj Imad Moghniyeh and the story would end there. That’s not how we act. I would like to stress for you that in the past two years we had within our reach many modest aims but we did not make use of them because it is Hajj Imad Moghniyeh whose revenge we are seeking. This is in frank words. We know the goals and consequently the timing and the place. We know which operation might achieve this goal and then we might tell the Israelis this is Hezbollah’s response to your assassination of its jihadi leader. Our choices are open. We may take our time. No one is pressing on us. Let no one begrudge us. Our enemy is alarmed. Let them remain worried every day and in every place and field and concerning all goals. But it is we who will choose the time and the place and the goal. Today on the anniversary of Hajj Imad Moghniyeh I tell you and all his family, friends and dear ones: We want a revenge as great as Imad Moghniyeh. That’s what we are searching for. We do not want revenge for the sake of revenge, but in order to defend all of our leaders, cadres and the cause which Imad Moghniyeh represents.
In this blessed and dear occasion, we are by your side Inshallah to assume this responsibility together. After the long years with Sheikh Ragheb, Sayyed Abbass and Hajj Imad whom people got to know after his martyrdom, Inshallah we are loyal to their achievement, recommendations and path. We tell our martyrs – all our martyrs: Rest assured. The banner you raised will remain raised. The path you opened will remain open. The cause you sacrificed your lives for will be fulfilled. Your blood will not make in our nation but victory. We are your sons, your pupils and your brothers and we will fulfill your dreams Inshallah. You are in the paradise of Heaven enjoying the company of prophets and the sincere. You enjoy your rewards, glow and high esteem. Rest assured our leaders! You left behind sons, pupils and brethrens who keep the vow they made to Allah. Some have passed away as martyrs and some are still awaiting their martyrdom but they never changed their stance.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
1,000 Architects and Engineers Call for Grand Jury into 9/11! This GLOBAL MEDIA EVENT will be simultaneously hosted in over 23 cities worldwide!
1,000 Signatures from “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth)” to be Submitted Today to Congress—Petition Cites New Scientific Evidence of Explosive Demolition at WTC
This GLOBAL MEDIA EVENT will be simultaneously hosted in over 23 cities worldwide!
WHEN: Friday February 19, 2010, 10:00-11:00 AM
WHERE: Ground Zero, Manhattan (in front of the PATH Station)
Actor Daniel Sunjata, and Author Sander Hicks, for AE911Truth, will discuss the evidence and the significance of this petition with the public at Ground Zero.
More than 1,000 independent architects and engineers world-wide now support the call for an independent investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings (1, 2, and 7).
These scientists have signed a 9/11 Truth Petition calling on Congress to launch a new investigation. AE911truth.org calls for a Grand Jury probe into John Gross and Shyam Sunder, managers of the reports by National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST).
* The discovery of advanced explosive nano-thermitic material found in each of the WTC dust samples by top nuclear physicist Dr. Steven E. Jones, and a peer-reviewed panel of top international scientists.
* Eyewitness testimony cited multiple experiences of secondary explosions, even before the first plane hit WTC 1.
The implications of these findings have the potential of profound impact on the Khalid Sheikh Mohammed trial.
GLOBAL DAY OF MEDIA OUTREACH
This press conference will be simultaneously hosted in over 23 cities worldwide, including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Alexandria, VA, Tampa, as well as cities in Canada, Belgium, Denmark, Australia and New Zealand. The SF press conference will be accessible to media (audio and video) via webinar at www.ae911truth.org. at 11:00am PST on Friday Feb 19, 2010.
9/11 Commission Chairmen Kean & Hamilton seriously criticized their own Commission in their book "Without Precedent." They complained their investigation was "set up to fail" and that they had been lied to by NORAD. Their special counsel, John Farmer, recently wrote, "that "at some level of the government…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”
AE911Truth is a non-partisan association of architects, engineers, and affiliates, who are dedicated to exposing the falsehoods and to revealing truths about the destruction of all three WTC high-rises on 9/11/2001. http://www.AE911Truth.org
Background on Sander Hicks, AE911Truth Affiliate:
Author and journalist, Hicks hosted the “We Demand Transparency” conference, which featured Richard Gage, founder of AE911Truth. Hicks served as an “expert witness” on 9/11 in a recent NJ trial. See: http://sanderhicks.com/Misprision.html
Background on Daniel Sunjata:
Daniel Sunjata is Tony-nominated actor and star of stage, screen and TV. He co-stars in the FX television show, “Rescue Me” alongside Dennis Leary. Earlier this year, a “Rescue Me” subplot even incorporated his belief that the attacks were an “inside job.”
Sander Hicks, for AE911Truth.org,
347 446 4461 (Cell) • 347 627 4705 (W)
9/11 Truth Returns to Left Forum:
Truth is Revolutionary.
Truth is Anti-imperialist.
We are Unstoppable.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
by Elizabeth Woodworth for Global Research
In the past year, in response to emerging independent science on the 9/11 attacks, nine corporate, seven public, and two independent media outlets aired analytic programs investigating the official account. Increasingly, the issue is treated as a scientific controversy worthy of debate, rather than as a "conspiracy theory" ignoring science and common sense. This essay presents these media analyses in the form of 18 case studies. Eight countries – Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway and Russia – have allowed their publicly-owned broadcasting stations to air the full spectrum of evidence challenging the truth of the official account of 9/11.
This more open approach taken in the international media – I could also have included the Japanese media – might be a sign that worldwide public and corporate media organizations are positioning themselves, and preparing their audiences, for a possible revelation of the truth of the claim that forces within the US government were complicit in the attacks – a revelation that would call into question the publicly given rationale for the military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
The evidence now being explored in the international media may pave the way for the US media to take an in-depth look at the implications of what is now known about 9/11, and to re-examine the country's foreign and domestic policies in the light of this knowledge.
read the full article here:
Note: Russia's TV Channel 1 organized a major 9/11 event hosted by Alexander Gordon's "Private Viewing" (Закрытый Показ) show which showed the movie "Zero: a 9/11 investigation" followed by a debate featuring Franco Fracassi and Europarlamentarian Guilietto Chiesa (the authors of this documentary), Thierry Meyssan (the french reporter who was the first to raise questions about 9/11), Lieutenant-General Leonid Ivashev, ex KGB experts and many 9/11 witnesses and survivors (For those of you who understand Russian - you can download the full movie and debate here: http://www.rutor.org/torrent/6646/911-rassledovanie-s-nulja_zero-investigation-into-9/11-2007-tvrip). The discussion ended in what can only be called a crushing defeat for the supporters of the "official" 9/11 narrative with even Alexander Gordon himself backing the 'truthers" (Gordon, who lived and worked in the USA for many years is usually known for his pro-USA views).
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Alan Dershowitz on Judge Goldstone: “But now I see him as a traitor… It’s as if they would have taken a Jew to edit the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. He uses his Jewish last name to kosher his slander of the Jewish People.”
For those who still cannot make their minds up about Jewish nationalism and the Zionist violent abuse of Western academic culture (tolerance, academic freedom, pluralism etc) Rabbi Shmully Hecht of Yale’s University Jewish society, gives an exemplary opportunity to see it all. Rabbi Hecht confronted Judge Goldstone last week while Goldstone was delivering an address at Yale University. Rabbi Hecht and his supporters held up a sign at the back of the conference room equating the Goldstone report with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the Dreyfus affair.
For a while, the Dreyfus affair and the Protocols were pretty effective Zionist propaganda tools, they were used mainly to silence criticism of Jewish power, Jewish lobbying and Israel. However, it is about time to face the truth.
Drawing a parallel between the Dreyfus affair, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the Goldstone report can also produce an interesting insight, but not for the reasons Rabbi Hecht or Dershowitz suggest. It allows us to look at Zionism in an historical perspective. We can review where Zionism started from and what it matured into.
The Dreyfus affair was a political scandal that divided France in the 1890s and the early 1900s. It involved the conviction for treason in 1894 of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a young French artillery officer of Jewish descent. The Dreyfus affair had a huge impact on Herzl, the father of Zionism, who was assigned by a Viennese paper to cover the trial. Soon afterward, Herzl wrote Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State, 1896) and founded the World Zionist Organization.
During the last century Zionists regarded the Dreyfus Affair as an exemplary case of anti Semitism motivated by racial discrimination. In fact the Zionists were wrong. For a century they have been misleading themselves and others. French society at the time was divided about Dreyfus. The Left and the intelligentsia rushed to support the young officer, which led eventually to a 2nd trial. Dreyfus was exonerated and reinstated as a Major in the French Army in 1906. However, the case of Goldstone is totally different. The images of the IDF’s white phosphorus shells bursting over UN refugee shelters are engraved in our collective memory. As if this is not enough, initial Israeli denial of the usage of white phosphorous is also stored in our minds. The perception that Israel committed a massacre in broad daylight is not going to be wiped out either.
Unlike divided France that couldn’t make up its mind about Dreyfus, we are not divided about Israel being a criminal state and the biggest threat to world peace. The repulsion towards Israel and its brutality is actually a growing unifying force amongst humanists, peace lovers and the world at large. Israel will not be exonerated and considering the fact that it defines itself as the Jewish state, its crimes reflect disastrously on Jews as a collective, something that not even a dozen Jewish anti Zionist activists around the world can change. From an historical perspective it is rather clear that Israel has been very successful in exhausting the last drops of sympathy garnered for the idea of Jewish nationalism. As it happens, not a single humanist stands up against Goldstone or his balanced report.
But the truth must be said. As much as humanists are united behind the Goldstone report, our democratically elected leaders are failing to confront Israel and its Jewish lobbies. They rush to appease AIPAC, they pocket money given by Zionist lords and Israeli Lobbies. Interestingly enough, the political morbid conditions in which we live was actually described by an unusual fictional text that was published in 1903 namely, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
The Protocols is widely considered a forgery. It is a manual for a prospective new member of the "Elders", describing how they will run the world through control of the media and finance, replacing the traditional social order with one based on mass manipulation. Though the book is considered a hoax by most experts and regarded as a vile anti-Semitic text, it is impossible to ignore its prophetic qualities and its capacity to describe both the century unfolding and the political reality in which we live I am referring here to: AIPAC, The Credit Crunch, Lehman Brothers, Neocon wars, interventionist ideology, a British Foreign Secretary Listed as Israeli Propaganda (Hasbara) author trying to amend Britain’s ethical stand, a Zionist by admission put on an inquiry panel to investigate why Britain launched a Zionist war and so on.
As it happens staunch Zionists such as David Aaronovitch, Nick Cohen and Alan Dershowitz use a very banal spin to divert the attention from the devastating prophetic reality depicted by the Protocols. A reality in which they themselves promote interventionist wars in our midst. Again and again they stress the fact that the Protocols was a forgery. They insist that we look at its anti Semitic origin while evading its content and meaning. However whether or not the Protocols is a fictional text or a forgery doesn’t change the fact that it explores our disastrous contemporary reality. A reality in which we are killing en mass the enemies of Israel in the ‘name of democracy’, a reality in which Dershowitz himself puts enormous effort into cleansing academia of any critical voices of Israel, Zionism and Jewish power in America and the West.
This is exactly where Goldstone is coming into the picture. In the last century we have been witnessing an evolving murderous Jewish nationalist movement. A movement that was born in part due to a calculated misinterpretation of the Dreyfus affair. For a century, the Zionist movement has managed to silence its critics using different tactics that are all explored in that fictional text from 1903. Zionism was very successful; it managed to mature into a state, at the expense of the Palestinian people. Only through violent expansionist methods including massacres and racially orientated ethnic cleansing have the Zionists and Israel managed to fulfill what they define as the Jewish national aspiration. But as Goldstone reveals, this aspiration matured into a criminal state that is terrorizing its indigenous population and threatening its neighbours
If we ever want to amend the reality we live in, we must curtail the Zionist operators in our midst, in the government, in politics, in the media, in academia, in finance and in the legal system. I am not talking here about Jews but about Zionists, people who are affiliated with a specific foreign tribal interest that counters universalism, ethics and humanism. Unless we do that we may soon have to face another Goldstone report investigating a much greater Zionist crime against humanity.
If we want to help Israelis and Jewish nationalists recover from their nationalist racist fanatical dream, we must persuade them that the Goldstone report is their new Bible, a recent catalogue of their departure from humanity.
Commentary: I would like to add a small thing here. Without going into an endless discussion opposing the hordes of Protocol-debunkers to such historians as Oleg Platonov and others I would note a simple thing: if the Protocols are a forgery made by the Czarist secret service, that Czarist secret service employed analysts and futurologues whose skills can be compared with the greast prophets of human history, bar none. In that case, I cannot help but wonder why these Czarist anti-Semitic prophets failed to predict the largely Jewish Revolution of 1917 and the murder of the Czar and his family by Bolshevik Jews.