Cry to those using babies
By Naomi Ragen
My son is in the army. He is not the type at all, believe me. Quiet, studious, a writer, a lover of Jewish history, Talmud, ethics. He spent two years in a pre-army program in the Galilee called Karmei Hayil. He made many good friends there from all over the country, and now he and all his friends are in the army. One of them I know well. A bit chubby, with payot (sidelocks) and a great laugh. He and my son have become like brothers. While both of them tried out for the elite paratroopers unit, only his friend made it in. He and his unit are the ones in Lebanon. They were there over a week, fighting under horrific conditions, running out of food and water. Even though the Israel Air Force dropped tons of leaflets warning civilians to flee because they were in terrorist territory and likely to be injured, they still encountered civilians.
My son spoke to his friend yesterday, and this is how he described it: "The village looked empty, and then we heard noises coming from one of the houses, so we opened fire. But when we went inside, we found two women and a child huddled in the corner of the room. We were so relieved we hadn't hurt them. We took up base in one of the empty houses. And then all of a sudden, we came under intense fire. Three rockets were fired at the house we were in. Only one managed to destroy a wall, which fell on one of us, covering him in white dust, but otherwise not hurting him.
"I spent the whole time feeding bullets to my friend who was shooting nonstop. We managed to kill 26 terrorists. Not one of us was hurt. Our commanding officer kept walking around, touching everybody on the shoulder, smiling and encouraging us: 'We're are better than they are. Don't worry.' It calmed us all down. And really, we were much better than them. They are a lousy army. They only win when they hide behind baby carriages." Please remember this when you hear about the "atrocity" of the Israeli bomb that killed many civilians in Kafr Qana, a place from which Hezbollah has fired hundreds of rockets at Israel.
Unlike previous administrations, Mr. Olmert has my respect when he says: "They were warned to leave. It is the responsibility of Hezbollah for firing rockets amid civilians." Terrorists and their supporters have lost the right to complain about civilian casualties, since all they have is one goal: this entire war is to target civilians. Every single one of the more than 2,500 rockets launched into Israel, is launched into populated towns filled with women and children. Just today, another explosive belt meant to kill civilians in Israel was detonated harmlessly by our forces in Nablus.
So don't cry to me about civilian casualties. Cry to those using babies and wives and mothers; cry to those who store weapons in mosques, ambulances, hospitals and private homes. Cry to those launching deadly rockets from the backyards of kindergartens and schools. Cry to the heartless men who love death, and however many of their troops or civilians die, consider themselves victorious as long as they can keep on firing rockets at our women and children. Save your sympathy for the mothers and sisters and girlfriends of our young soldiers who would rather be sitting in study halls learning Torah, but have no choice but to risk their precious lives full of hope, goodness and endless potential, to wipe out the cancerous terrorist cells that threaten their people and all mankind. Make your choice, and save your tears. That terrorists have been unsuccessful in killing more of our women and children is due to our army, God and prayers, not to any lack of motivation or intention on their part. If you hide behind your baby to shoot at my baby, you are responsible for getting children killed. You and you alone.
The writer is an American-born novelist and playwright who lives in Jerusalem.
Monday, July 31, 2006
Picture of child and Nasrallah
There is nothing more terrible than those kids killed in the war. But it is almost as painful to think at the children who survive but they are educated in the culture of hate, blood, war and revange.Can we find hope, somewhere?
The demons of war at work.
There is no excuse for innocent death. The demons of war are thirsty, they get plenty of blood those days and it seems that they are not happy yet. There is more to come.
We hardly can look at the any war image, we try to find excuses and reason where we can find dry reason but not for much comfort.
We use planes, tanks, canons, ground troops in our ”fight for peace “, Hisb’allah uses indiscriminate rockets fire and human shields, baby shields. Is any weapon legitimate?
We kill for Peace. They kill for the Prophet. Enough!
We hardly can look at the any war image, we try to find excuses and reason where we can find dry reason but not for much comfort.
We use planes, tanks, canons, ground troops in our ”fight for peace “, Hisb’allah uses indiscriminate rockets fire and human shields, baby shields. Is any weapon legitimate?
We kill for Peace. They kill for the Prophet. Enough!
Sunday, July 30, 2006
Food for thought (from Jerusalem Post)
Our World: Seeing the war in its true colors
Caroline Glick, THE JERUSALEM POST July 25, 2006
Today US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet with PrimeMinister Ehud Olmert. The press reports leading up to their meeting were full of details about how European armies wish to send their forces to Lebanon. The reports also noted that Israel will be expected to surrender the Shaba Farms on Mount Dov to Lebanon in exchange for promises of security.For their part, Israeli leaders from Olmert to Defense Minister Amir Peretz to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni have been demonstrating a disturbing lack of resolve. Their statements expose a consistent watering down of the goal of the IDF's mission in Lebanon - from destroying Hizbullah as a fighting force to weakening it as a fighting force and "paving the way for a diplomatic settlement" that will apparently include Hizbullah. On the other hand, other voices make clear that despite the best wishes of the government and the Israeli left-wing intelligentsia, it is far from clear that the IDF will end its operations without victory achieved.
For instance, writing in The Sunday Times, former Conservative MPMichael Portillo told his British countrymen that their hostility forIsrael and the US aside, "The bloody truth is that Israel's war is our war." Portillo went on to argue that given the threat that Iran and Hizbullah pose to Britain itself, "for us to turn against Israel and America would be perverse and potentially suicidal.
"STRENGTHENING the view that opposition to war against Iran and its proxies is suicidal, it was reported Sunday that Bulgarian border guards along their border with Romania had intercepted a British truck filled with radioactive materials for building a so-called dirty bomb. The components, which included dangerous quantities of radioactive caesium 137 and americium-beryllium, were stored in 10 lead-lined boxes addressed to the Iranian Ministry of Defense. According to the Daily Mail, this was the second time in less than a year that a British shipment of nuclear materials had been stopped by Bulgarian border guards. Last August, Bulgaria stopped a shipment of zirconium silicate, which can be used as a component of a nuclear warhead, at its border with Turkey en route to Iran. THE CURRENT campaign in northern Israel and Lebanon has brought into sharp focus the major pathologies and strengths of the West in fighting the Iranian-led jihadist axis. The British government's push for a cease-fire, together with the enthusiasm of the UN and France for sending their own troops to Lebanon to protect the Lebanese from the"disproportionate" Israelis; the demand of Israel's radical Left that a deal be made with Syria; and the demands of leftist ideologues in the US that an artificial deadline be set for the conclusion of Israel's operations in Lebanon all point to a similar pathology. As a group, the ideological Left rejects the notion of victory in war for Western forces (although it is fine for jihadists); rejects the notion that there are enemies that are impossible to appease; and specifically rejects the idea that Israel has a right to defend itself against its enemies, let alone vanquish its foes.
LET US BE clear. The European foreign ministers and UN envoys who are tripping over one another on their way to Jerusalem are the same European foreign ministers and UN officials who brought about the misguided American decision to throw out 27 years of US practice and officially engage the mullahs in Teheran. That is, the same European governments now jockeying for a place in an international force that will protect Hizbullah from destruction are the ones who have been stymieing American attempts to take concerted action against Iran's nuclear weapons programs for the past three years.This is the pathology of the West. For if one takes the ideology of appeasing unappeasable foes to its logical conclusion, appeasing states will eventually join forces with their enemies against themselves, or, as Portillo put it, they will become suicidal. AND SO, Britain's Department of Trade and Industry can give export licenses to dirty bomb components en route to Iran. And so American columnists named Cohen can tell the world that Israel's existence is a mistake. And so, Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, can refuse to acknowledge that Hizbullah is an Iranian-run terrorist organization dedicated to Islamic world domination even as its supporters throughout Europe hold mass demonstrations where they hold signs calling for Europe's destruction at the hands of Hizbullah and Iran in the name of Islam. And so Yossi Beilin can say that Israel doesn't need to worry about the repercussions of standing down while a fifth of its population sits in bomb shelters, because Hizbullah is just a measly terrorist organization that poses no real threat to the country. On the other hand, events of the past two weeks have also shown some of the West's greatest strengths in fighting the war so many of its powerful citizens and statesmen refuse to acknowledge. First of all, the IDF has discarded its dangerous delusions that it will be possible to win this war by remote control. Today it fights like an army that knows it is both at war, and at war with an enemy that needs to be destroyed, whatever the price may be. SEVERAL supporters of Israel were quick to write off the IDF in the wake of unsupported statements by Chief of General Staff Dan Halutz and his generals last week, in which they announced - based perhaps on the tonnage of ordnance IAF jets dropped on Lebanon - that Israel had destroyed up to fifty percent of Hizbullah's capacities."Israel is losing this war," these commentators moaned, not recognizing that the IDF is capable of learning from its mistakes. "Israel's intelligence services fell asleep on their watch," it was said. But these eagerly defeatist voices do not recognize that the failure was not one of intelligence, but of politics. Mesmerized by the dovish ideologies propounded by three consecutive governments, it took the General Staff a week to understand that Israel was at war. BUT NOW they know. And now the IDF is fighting well, boldly and effectively on the ground. Halutz initiated a rolling mobilization of the reserves, and the IAF has pulled back to its proper supportive role. As well, it is impossible not to recognize the Bush administration's centrality in the current campaign. Not only is the US rearming the IAF with bunker buster bombs, it is making certain that its own public andthe international community recognize that what is at stake here is fargreater than the well-being of Israel's citizens.
As President George W. Bush has made clear, this is not just Israel's war. This is a campaign of the Iranian-led axis of jihad that seeks to dominate the entire free world. And echoing Bush are voices like Portillo's that are heard from Beirut to Sydney. Moreover, by rising to the challenge Hizbullah, Syria and Iran have placed before it, the entire Israeli public is setting an example for its army, its government and the world to follow. Families in the North are stoically accepting the around-the-clock bombardments and standing strong in their demand for victory. Families in the rest of the country are opening their homes to thousands of refugees from Haifa and Nahariya and Tiberias. As a friend put it the other day, "Halutz has no choice but to win. Israel is a country with five million chiefs of staff and they are all breathing down his neck."FINALLY, the campaign in Lebanon is indeed the opening salvo of Iran's war against the free world. But this works both ways. Iran and Hizbullah believe that the ferocity of the attacks against Israel will deter us all from taking action against Iran's nuclear facilities. But by giving the West the opportunity to fight it first in Lebanon, Teheran is providing the US, Israel and others with critical intelligence about its own installations. The subterranean bunkers insouth Lebanon that IDF ground forces are now conquering were built byIranian Revolutionary Guards units and designed by Iranian engineers -the same forces that conceived and constructed Iran's nuclear installations. IN 1982, when Israel destroyed the Syrian Soviet-made and trained airforce in Lebanon, it was able to provide the US with critical information about the Soviet Air Force and its air defense systems that enabled the US to outstrip both in a manner that all but sealed the fate of the evil empire. Today, by fighting Iran's proxy, Hizbullah, Israel is amassing information that will be critical for planning a successful strike against Iran's nuclear installations.It is impossible to know what will actually be discussed today as Olmert meets with Rice. But it must be hoped that now that the US, Israel and other Western states are acknowledging the true nature of the war against Israel, they will abandon their suicidal demons and use this campaign as a stepping stone for neutralizing its chief instigator: The Islamic Republic of Iran.
Caroline Glick, THE JERUSALEM POST July 25, 2006
Today US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will meet with PrimeMinister Ehud Olmert. The press reports leading up to their meeting were full of details about how European armies wish to send their forces to Lebanon. The reports also noted that Israel will be expected to surrender the Shaba Farms on Mount Dov to Lebanon in exchange for promises of security.For their part, Israeli leaders from Olmert to Defense Minister Amir Peretz to Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni have been demonstrating a disturbing lack of resolve. Their statements expose a consistent watering down of the goal of the IDF's mission in Lebanon - from destroying Hizbullah as a fighting force to weakening it as a fighting force and "paving the way for a diplomatic settlement" that will apparently include Hizbullah. On the other hand, other voices make clear that despite the best wishes of the government and the Israeli left-wing intelligentsia, it is far from clear that the IDF will end its operations without victory achieved.
For instance, writing in The Sunday Times, former Conservative MPMichael Portillo told his British countrymen that their hostility forIsrael and the US aside, "The bloody truth is that Israel's war is our war." Portillo went on to argue that given the threat that Iran and Hizbullah pose to Britain itself, "for us to turn against Israel and America would be perverse and potentially suicidal.
"STRENGTHENING the view that opposition to war against Iran and its proxies is suicidal, it was reported Sunday that Bulgarian border guards along their border with Romania had intercepted a British truck filled with radioactive materials for building a so-called dirty bomb. The components, which included dangerous quantities of radioactive caesium 137 and americium-beryllium, were stored in 10 lead-lined boxes addressed to the Iranian Ministry of Defense. According to the Daily Mail, this was the second time in less than a year that a British shipment of nuclear materials had been stopped by Bulgarian border guards. Last August, Bulgaria stopped a shipment of zirconium silicate, which can be used as a component of a nuclear warhead, at its border with Turkey en route to Iran. THE CURRENT campaign in northern Israel and Lebanon has brought into sharp focus the major pathologies and strengths of the West in fighting the Iranian-led jihadist axis. The British government's push for a cease-fire, together with the enthusiasm of the UN and France for sending their own troops to Lebanon to protect the Lebanese from the"disproportionate" Israelis; the demand of Israel's radical Left that a deal be made with Syria; and the demands of leftist ideologues in the US that an artificial deadline be set for the conclusion of Israel's operations in Lebanon all point to a similar pathology. As a group, the ideological Left rejects the notion of victory in war for Western forces (although it is fine for jihadists); rejects the notion that there are enemies that are impossible to appease; and specifically rejects the idea that Israel has a right to defend itself against its enemies, let alone vanquish its foes.
LET US BE clear. The European foreign ministers and UN envoys who are tripping over one another on their way to Jerusalem are the same European foreign ministers and UN officials who brought about the misguided American decision to throw out 27 years of US practice and officially engage the mullahs in Teheran. That is, the same European governments now jockeying for a place in an international force that will protect Hizbullah from destruction are the ones who have been stymieing American attempts to take concerted action against Iran's nuclear weapons programs for the past three years.This is the pathology of the West. For if one takes the ideology of appeasing unappeasable foes to its logical conclusion, appeasing states will eventually join forces with their enemies against themselves, or, as Portillo put it, they will become suicidal. AND SO, Britain's Department of Trade and Industry can give export licenses to dirty bomb components en route to Iran. And so American columnists named Cohen can tell the world that Israel's existence is a mistake. And so, Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, can refuse to acknowledge that Hizbullah is an Iranian-run terrorist organization dedicated to Islamic world domination even as its supporters throughout Europe hold mass demonstrations where they hold signs calling for Europe's destruction at the hands of Hizbullah and Iran in the name of Islam. And so Yossi Beilin can say that Israel doesn't need to worry about the repercussions of standing down while a fifth of its population sits in bomb shelters, because Hizbullah is just a measly terrorist organization that poses no real threat to the country. On the other hand, events of the past two weeks have also shown some of the West's greatest strengths in fighting the war so many of its powerful citizens and statesmen refuse to acknowledge. First of all, the IDF has discarded its dangerous delusions that it will be possible to win this war by remote control. Today it fights like an army that knows it is both at war, and at war with an enemy that needs to be destroyed, whatever the price may be. SEVERAL supporters of Israel were quick to write off the IDF in the wake of unsupported statements by Chief of General Staff Dan Halutz and his generals last week, in which they announced - based perhaps on the tonnage of ordnance IAF jets dropped on Lebanon - that Israel had destroyed up to fifty percent of Hizbullah's capacities."Israel is losing this war," these commentators moaned, not recognizing that the IDF is capable of learning from its mistakes. "Israel's intelligence services fell asleep on their watch," it was said. But these eagerly defeatist voices do not recognize that the failure was not one of intelligence, but of politics. Mesmerized by the dovish ideologies propounded by three consecutive governments, it took the General Staff a week to understand that Israel was at war. BUT NOW they know. And now the IDF is fighting well, boldly and effectively on the ground. Halutz initiated a rolling mobilization of the reserves, and the IAF has pulled back to its proper supportive role. As well, it is impossible not to recognize the Bush administration's centrality in the current campaign. Not only is the US rearming the IAF with bunker buster bombs, it is making certain that its own public andthe international community recognize that what is at stake here is fargreater than the well-being of Israel's citizens.
As President George W. Bush has made clear, this is not just Israel's war. This is a campaign of the Iranian-led axis of jihad that seeks to dominate the entire free world. And echoing Bush are voices like Portillo's that are heard from Beirut to Sydney. Moreover, by rising to the challenge Hizbullah, Syria and Iran have placed before it, the entire Israeli public is setting an example for its army, its government and the world to follow. Families in the North are stoically accepting the around-the-clock bombardments and standing strong in their demand for victory. Families in the rest of the country are opening their homes to thousands of refugees from Haifa and Nahariya and Tiberias. As a friend put it the other day, "Halutz has no choice but to win. Israel is a country with five million chiefs of staff and they are all breathing down his neck."FINALLY, the campaign in Lebanon is indeed the opening salvo of Iran's war against the free world. But this works both ways. Iran and Hizbullah believe that the ferocity of the attacks against Israel will deter us all from taking action against Iran's nuclear facilities. But by giving the West the opportunity to fight it first in Lebanon, Teheran is providing the US, Israel and others with critical intelligence about its own installations. The subterranean bunkers insouth Lebanon that IDF ground forces are now conquering were built byIranian Revolutionary Guards units and designed by Iranian engineers -the same forces that conceived and constructed Iran's nuclear installations. IN 1982, when Israel destroyed the Syrian Soviet-made and trained airforce in Lebanon, it was able to provide the US with critical information about the Soviet Air Force and its air defense systems that enabled the US to outstrip both in a manner that all but sealed the fate of the evil empire. Today, by fighting Iran's proxy, Hizbullah, Israel is amassing information that will be critical for planning a successful strike against Iran's nuclear installations.It is impossible to know what will actually be discussed today as Olmert meets with Rice. But it must be hoped that now that the US, Israel and other Western states are acknowledging the true nature of the war against Israel, they will abandon their suicidal demons and use this campaign as a stepping stone for neutralizing its chief instigator: The Islamic Republic of Iran.
Friday, July 28, 2006
Joschka Fisher's comment (from Ha-Aretz)
A proxy war
By Joschka Fischer
Haifa, Beirut and many other Lebanese and Israeli towns and villages are under fire. Who would have thought this possible a few weeks ago? Across the globe, the reaction to the images of destruction and death in Lebanon, but also in Gaza and Israel, has been one of abhorrence. The current war in Lebanon is not a war by the Arab world against Israel; rather, it is a war orchestrated by the region's radical forces - Hamas and Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria and Iran - which fundamentally reject any settlement with Israel. Conflict was sought for three reasons: first to ease pressure on Hamas from within the Palestinian community to recognize Israel; second to undermine democratization in Lebanon, which was marginalizing Syria; and third to lift attention from the emerging dispute over the Iranian nuclear program and demonstrate to the West the "tools" at its disposal in the case of a conflict.
Moderate Arab governments understand full well the issue at stake in this war: It is about regional hegemony in the case of Syria with Lebanon and Palestine and, on a wider level, Iran's hegemonic claim to the entire Middle East. Yet the war in Lebanon and Gaza could prove to be a miscalculation for the radicals. By firing missiles on Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, a boundary has been crossed. From now on, the issue is no longer primarily one of territory, restitution or occupation. Instead, the main issue is the strategic threat to Israel's existence.
The rejectionist front has underestimated Israel's determination and capacity for deterrence. It has proved there is no way back to the status quo in Lebanon, and it revealed Iran's hegemonic aspirations to the entire world. The folly of this is readily apparent, because it doesn't require much imagination to see what the Middle East would look like if an Iranian nuclear umbrella were shielding the radicals.
This miscalculation will become obvious as four developments unfold: Israel avoids being sucked into a ground war in Lebanon; b UN Resolution 1559 - which requires the disarmament of all militias in Lebanon with the help of the international community - is enforced and a return to the status quo rendered impossible; b today's de facto "anti-hegemon" coalition, comprising moderate Arab countries (including moderate Palestinians), is transformed into a robust and serious peace initiative; and b the Quartet, led by the United States, becomes actively engaged for a viable solution and provides the necessary political, economic and military guarantees to sustain it over time. Israel has a key role to play here. Twice, it withdrew its troops unilaterally behind its recognized borders, namely from southern Lebanon and Gaza. Both times, Israel's land-for-peace formula resulted in land for war.
Now, with the existence of Israel under threat, peace with its Arab neighbors seems a more distant prospect than ever. I believe today's war in Lebanon can open up a new opportunity for peace. The sooner the guns are silenced in Lebanon, the better. But let's not forget the war's starting point: the clash within Hamas over whether to recognize Israel. And let's not forget the attitude of moderate Arab governments toward this war and to the hidden intentions of those who sought it. Israel's security makes a restructuring of Lebanon's internal organization and a guarantee of Lebanon's state sovereignty nonnegotiable.
Now is the time to play the Syrian card and bring President Bashar Assad onto the path of normalization. With the Golan Heights, Israel has the key element in its hand. Without Syria, Iran would be alone. Iraq, too, would profit from such a development. Finally, things are not as hopeless for the Palestinians as they may seem. In Israel's prisons, a consensus has developed among leading Fatah and Hamas Palestinian inmates on accepting a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. This new Palestinian realism must be supported. But there can be no way past the historic date of June 1967 (for both sides). How then, will Israel define its security in the future? Currently, Israel emphasizes massive deterrence, but it would be well advised to utilize the political and diplomatic possibilities presented by this war and take the initiative from a position of strength to offer a comprehensive peace to all those who are ready to recognize its existence and permanently renounce violence, not just in word, but also in deed. Now is the time to think big! This applies not only to Israel and its neighbors, but to the U.S. and Europe as well. This war offers a chance for lasting peace. We must not let it slip away.
Joschka Fischer, a leader of the Green Party for nearly 20 years, was Germany's foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 to 2005. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute for Human Sciences.
By Joschka Fischer
Haifa, Beirut and many other Lebanese and Israeli towns and villages are under fire. Who would have thought this possible a few weeks ago? Across the globe, the reaction to the images of destruction and death in Lebanon, but also in Gaza and Israel, has been one of abhorrence. The current war in Lebanon is not a war by the Arab world against Israel; rather, it is a war orchestrated by the region's radical forces - Hamas and Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Syria and Iran - which fundamentally reject any settlement with Israel. Conflict was sought for three reasons: first to ease pressure on Hamas from within the Palestinian community to recognize Israel; second to undermine democratization in Lebanon, which was marginalizing Syria; and third to lift attention from the emerging dispute over the Iranian nuclear program and demonstrate to the West the "tools" at its disposal in the case of a conflict.
Moderate Arab governments understand full well the issue at stake in this war: It is about regional hegemony in the case of Syria with Lebanon and Palestine and, on a wider level, Iran's hegemonic claim to the entire Middle East. Yet the war in Lebanon and Gaza could prove to be a miscalculation for the radicals. By firing missiles on Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, a boundary has been crossed. From now on, the issue is no longer primarily one of territory, restitution or occupation. Instead, the main issue is the strategic threat to Israel's existence.
The rejectionist front has underestimated Israel's determination and capacity for deterrence. It has proved there is no way back to the status quo in Lebanon, and it revealed Iran's hegemonic aspirations to the entire world. The folly of this is readily apparent, because it doesn't require much imagination to see what the Middle East would look like if an Iranian nuclear umbrella were shielding the radicals.
This miscalculation will become obvious as four developments unfold: Israel avoids being sucked into a ground war in Lebanon; b UN Resolution 1559 - which requires the disarmament of all militias in Lebanon with the help of the international community - is enforced and a return to the status quo rendered impossible; b today's de facto "anti-hegemon" coalition, comprising moderate Arab countries (including moderate Palestinians), is transformed into a robust and serious peace initiative; and b the Quartet, led by the United States, becomes actively engaged for a viable solution and provides the necessary political, economic and military guarantees to sustain it over time. Israel has a key role to play here. Twice, it withdrew its troops unilaterally behind its recognized borders, namely from southern Lebanon and Gaza. Both times, Israel's land-for-peace formula resulted in land for war.
Now, with the existence of Israel under threat, peace with its Arab neighbors seems a more distant prospect than ever. I believe today's war in Lebanon can open up a new opportunity for peace. The sooner the guns are silenced in Lebanon, the better. But let's not forget the war's starting point: the clash within Hamas over whether to recognize Israel. And let's not forget the attitude of moderate Arab governments toward this war and to the hidden intentions of those who sought it. Israel's security makes a restructuring of Lebanon's internal organization and a guarantee of Lebanon's state sovereignty nonnegotiable.
Now is the time to play the Syrian card and bring President Bashar Assad onto the path of normalization. With the Golan Heights, Israel has the key element in its hand. Without Syria, Iran would be alone. Iraq, too, would profit from such a development. Finally, things are not as hopeless for the Palestinians as they may seem. In Israel's prisons, a consensus has developed among leading Fatah and Hamas Palestinian inmates on accepting a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. This new Palestinian realism must be supported. But there can be no way past the historic date of June 1967 (for both sides). How then, will Israel define its security in the future? Currently, Israel emphasizes massive deterrence, but it would be well advised to utilize the political and diplomatic possibilities presented by this war and take the initiative from a position of strength to offer a comprehensive peace to all those who are ready to recognize its existence and permanently renounce violence, not just in word, but also in deed. Now is the time to think big! This applies not only to Israel and its neighbors, but to the U.S. and Europe as well. This war offers a chance for lasting peace. We must not let it slip away.
Joschka Fischer, a leader of the Green Party for nearly 20 years, was Germany's foreign minister and vice chancellor from 1998 to 2005. Copyright: Project Syndicate/Institute for Human Sciences.
Cantina puscariei...
Stau la carciuma mea, Cafee Rehavia, lucrez, ingrijorat de situatia din jur. In jurul meu mai multi barbati decat muieri, la aceasta ora din zi, vineri dupa masa, ne asteapta sambata incremenita.Totii barbatii din jurul meu, rasi pe cap. Chelia la moda, si aici ca si la Bucuresti este de doua feluri : chelia celor pentru care parul a incetat sa fie o podoaba naturala, au chelit in mare parte "de la natura" si, felul doi, chelia celor care isi cauta un "look" dur, care sa impresioneze gagicile.
Rezultatul este acelasi, parca sunt la ora pranzului intr-o cantina de puscarie.
Am pus poza de alaturi, am nevoie de par frumos...
Diminishings expectations (from Ha-Aretz)
Diminishing expectations
By Doron Rosenblum
How flexible is happiness, how malleable is the level of people's expectations. Just two or three weeks ago, a happy report that has just been received on the radio and television news would have been Warren Buffet's purchase of Iscar, a bull market or a wave of performances in Israel by international artists. Now a happy report is the news that no one was killed although 10 were wounded, two seriously in a rocket salvo on Haifa. And a very encouraging report is that our forces succeeded in extricating a soldier's body.
The war of the speech
Humanity has known vicious wars that were triggered by bizarre causes: from the war of Troy and Greece because of love for Helen, to the assassination of Ferdinand in Sarajevo, which brought aboutWorld War I, to the soccer game that sparked a war between Hondurasand El Salvador. As Groucho Marx told the ambassador who refused to pull a card out of a deck: Of course, you know this means war!? Future researchers may hunt and comb to dig up all the historiosophic and political reasons for the outbreak of the current war with Hezbollah, but at least they will have no trouble finding the trigger. This war, with all its hundreds of casualties and tremendous damage, broke out not because of the abduction of the soldiers, but because of a speech: Hassan Nasrallah's short,bragging speech in which he provoked Israel's new leaders.Was it a clever trap laid by the wily fox, or perhaps one uncalculated moment of catastrophic hubris when, with that defiant smile, the Hezbollah leader told his listeners that Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz and Dan Halutz are inexperienced and small as compared with Ariel Sharon. And, as though to add fuel to the fire, he emphasized the small with his fingers. It's possible that the war would at least have been postponed if the prime minister or the defense minister had been a woman, or if Hezbollah had made do only with the incident in which soldiers were killed and abducted, without the provocative speech. But with that speech, and with this kind of cast on our side bad-tempered Olmert, egocentric Peretz, arrogant Halutz ? Nasrallah had a better chanceof emerging unscathed if he stood barefoot in a puddle and stuck a nail into an electric outlet. Is there a trigger that can light a fuse and generate testosterone more surely than that mocking smile and small gesture of the fingers? Whose blood wouldn't rush to his head? Who wouldn't be ready to get up and head-butt the man instantly, Zinadine-like? So the war, whatever its price, was unavoidable. Let us therefore not be surprised that it has no well-defined strategic goals. It burst out reflexively, like a blow delivered below the belt. And if anyone is still skeptical about the true motives for the war of the speech (not just Nasrallah's abduction speech, but also his spider-web speech of six years ago), the truth shall be revealed by the remarks of the chief of staff, Dan Halutz, this week: Bint Jbailis the symbol of Hezbollah, he said, against the backdrop of the fierce battles raging there. Nasrallah spoke there. And I would think that in his next speech if there is a next speech he will think carefully about his words. Who said the war's goals aren't clear?
Revenge of gibberish
Who thinks carefully about the words of his next speech around here? Could it be the overweening officers, both those in uniform and those who are retired, who have for years hijacked the national agenda, and whose boasting and patronizing (Benjamin Ben-Eliezer:That little dwarf, Nasrallah?; the commander of the Israel AirForce: The leader of that gang?) are shattered time and again by hitches, blunders, accidents, misses, clumsiness and a lack of creativity? Could it be the chief of staff himself, for whom the horrors of war are a small tremor on the wing of the plane? Or the former GOC Northern Command, Benny Gantz, who for years hurled threats at the enemy to the north, and this week was already philosophizing in the light of the difficulties on the ground about the need not to be militant, and adding: This is not the time to talk about what we said and did not say . Over the years this column has occasionally dealt with the phenomenon of hyper-security gibberish, based on the approach that such utterings are not trivial linguistic matters, but symptoms of a conceptual fogginess that have far-reaching implications. And indeed, it is increasingly clear that what we have here is not just a semantic hazard, but a genuine security danger. Because cliches and vague or untrue words reflect thinking that is automatic, insensitive and inert, casting over everything a pall of illusion, repression, empty pride and general unreliability.This is also the secret of the dark spell that Sheikh Nasrallah for years cast over the Israeli public. With his guile and alertness,the man simply succeeded in occupying the empty niche of the precise, credible comments of someone who means every word he says. This was the main source of his strength over us. On top of this, there was a gradual role reversal: Israel, its leaders and its spokespersons started to wrap themselves in the soft cotton of white and black lies, false promises, empty threats and arrogant fluffs of myth: We will know what to do, The IDF will know what to do, I wouldnot suggest to the enemy, The enemy is well aware of our might, The long arm of the IDF ... Now the gibberish is taking its revenge. Bewilderment, a lack of credibility and damage to morale are growing as the gap widens between the lofty words and the reality on the ground. Renewal of deterrent capability? Before that, we will do well to renew creativity and clarify of thought, which have become rusty underneath the layers of gibberish.
The knee-jerk dancers
Never mind the deja-vu of the feelings of tension and the pit in the stomach or, alternatively, the outbursts of revenge, which provide a moment's pleasure that accompany the flare-up of every new round of war here. All this is already part of our world and of the mental makeup of everyone who grows up in this country. The really oppressive thing, which is harder and harder to get used to with each new round, is the automatic reaction that accompanies it, like a boring ritual. After all, without any connection to the geopolitical or other circumstances of the war, we can predict the joy of the right wing's We told you so, which attributes everything to Oslo and demands that the IDF be allowed (once again?) to win, if only for the sake of the bashing itself (Netanyahu: Make mincemeat out of them!).Furthermore, we can also guess in advance the reflexive reaction of the peace camp, which in the inertia of its opposition each time to the use of force by Israel, no longer differentiates between declamations of occupation and the legitimate need to rid ourselves of subjugation to the threats and caprices of a Khomeini-ist bridgehead, which has leeched on to our carotid artery and challenges our very existence. In fact, those who advocate withdrawal to the last centimeter of the Green Line should be the first to leap, lion-like, to the defense of the sanctity of Israeli sovereignty; and not only vis-a-vis Hezbollah and Hamas, but also their patrons and inciters, the Syrians and the Iranians. But is it possible to imagine any military operation even one that is meant to underscore the Green Line without the automatic blessing of the settlers and the left's End the Occupation demonstration? People like to quote Henry Kissinger's remark that Israel has no foreign policy, only a domestic policy. But Kissinger was wrong. We don't have a domestic policy, either only reflexes and old habits.
The true spider-wed
How powerful is the rhetoric of Nasrallah, Saddam Hussein and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: Each of their metaphors ?(We will turn Israelinto a dry branch) is engraved in our consciousness more than 100 neo-Churchillean speeches of our prime minister, which were written by a committee of advisors, ad-men and spinners. Or may be it isn't so much their rhetorical power as it is our traumas. A case in point is Nasrallah's spider-web speech, which gives us no rest. And because each of Israel's wars is intended to heal thetraumas of the one before, and based on our mystical belief inwords especially those of our enemies it is no wonder that the military operation has been referred to as Webs of Steel. But Nasrallah and Saddam were right. No, not about the staying power and resilience of the national home about the staying power and resilience of the physical home. In other words, with respect to the quality of construction in Israel. It is here, in the contracting and planning shoddiness, that the true spider-webs of the home front exist, exposed anew in every war: thin walls, which if not for theair conditioner stuck in them from the outside to act as a counterweight to the plasma screen hanging on them from the inside, would turn into a heap of cinder blocks at the very sound of an air-raid siren; neighborhoods consisting of houses of cards which, wereit not for the security rooms on which they are grounded, would collapse by themselves; and ceilings that peel and flake even at the sound of fireworks and thunder. We don't need the IDF to prove that we are not teetering or temporary we need a good contractor.
Four words
The gist of Israel's foreign and defense policy in four words (while pedaling on a bike with training wheels): Look, Condy: nohands!
By Doron Rosenblum
How flexible is happiness, how malleable is the level of people's expectations. Just two or three weeks ago, a happy report that has just been received on the radio and television news would have been Warren Buffet's purchase of Iscar, a bull market or a wave of performances in Israel by international artists. Now a happy report is the news that no one was killed although 10 were wounded, two seriously in a rocket salvo on Haifa. And a very encouraging report is that our forces succeeded in extricating a soldier's body.
The war of the speech
Humanity has known vicious wars that were triggered by bizarre causes: from the war of Troy and Greece because of love for Helen, to the assassination of Ferdinand in Sarajevo, which brought aboutWorld War I, to the soccer game that sparked a war between Hondurasand El Salvador. As Groucho Marx told the ambassador who refused to pull a card out of a deck: Of course, you know this means war!? Future researchers may hunt and comb to dig up all the historiosophic and political reasons for the outbreak of the current war with Hezbollah, but at least they will have no trouble finding the trigger. This war, with all its hundreds of casualties and tremendous damage, broke out not because of the abduction of the soldiers, but because of a speech: Hassan Nasrallah's short,bragging speech in which he provoked Israel's new leaders.Was it a clever trap laid by the wily fox, or perhaps one uncalculated moment of catastrophic hubris when, with that defiant smile, the Hezbollah leader told his listeners that Ehud Olmert, Amir Peretz and Dan Halutz are inexperienced and small as compared with Ariel Sharon. And, as though to add fuel to the fire, he emphasized the small with his fingers. It's possible that the war would at least have been postponed if the prime minister or the defense minister had been a woman, or if Hezbollah had made do only with the incident in which soldiers were killed and abducted, without the provocative speech. But with that speech, and with this kind of cast on our side bad-tempered Olmert, egocentric Peretz, arrogant Halutz ? Nasrallah had a better chanceof emerging unscathed if he stood barefoot in a puddle and stuck a nail into an electric outlet. Is there a trigger that can light a fuse and generate testosterone more surely than that mocking smile and small gesture of the fingers? Whose blood wouldn't rush to his head? Who wouldn't be ready to get up and head-butt the man instantly, Zinadine-like? So the war, whatever its price, was unavoidable. Let us therefore not be surprised that it has no well-defined strategic goals. It burst out reflexively, like a blow delivered below the belt. And if anyone is still skeptical about the true motives for the war of the speech (not just Nasrallah's abduction speech, but also his spider-web speech of six years ago), the truth shall be revealed by the remarks of the chief of staff, Dan Halutz, this week: Bint Jbailis the symbol of Hezbollah, he said, against the backdrop of the fierce battles raging there. Nasrallah spoke there. And I would think that in his next speech if there is a next speech he will think carefully about his words. Who said the war's goals aren't clear?
Revenge of gibberish
Who thinks carefully about the words of his next speech around here? Could it be the overweening officers, both those in uniform and those who are retired, who have for years hijacked the national agenda, and whose boasting and patronizing (Benjamin Ben-Eliezer:That little dwarf, Nasrallah?; the commander of the Israel AirForce: The leader of that gang?) are shattered time and again by hitches, blunders, accidents, misses, clumsiness and a lack of creativity? Could it be the chief of staff himself, for whom the horrors of war are a small tremor on the wing of the plane? Or the former GOC Northern Command, Benny Gantz, who for years hurled threats at the enemy to the north, and this week was already philosophizing in the light of the difficulties on the ground about the need not to be militant, and adding: This is not the time to talk about what we said and did not say . Over the years this column has occasionally dealt with the phenomenon of hyper-security gibberish, based on the approach that such utterings are not trivial linguistic matters, but symptoms of a conceptual fogginess that have far-reaching implications. And indeed, it is increasingly clear that what we have here is not just a semantic hazard, but a genuine security danger. Because cliches and vague or untrue words reflect thinking that is automatic, insensitive and inert, casting over everything a pall of illusion, repression, empty pride and general unreliability.This is also the secret of the dark spell that Sheikh Nasrallah for years cast over the Israeli public. With his guile and alertness,the man simply succeeded in occupying the empty niche of the precise, credible comments of someone who means every word he says. This was the main source of his strength over us. On top of this, there was a gradual role reversal: Israel, its leaders and its spokespersons started to wrap themselves in the soft cotton of white and black lies, false promises, empty threats and arrogant fluffs of myth: We will know what to do, The IDF will know what to do, I wouldnot suggest to the enemy, The enemy is well aware of our might, The long arm of the IDF ... Now the gibberish is taking its revenge. Bewilderment, a lack of credibility and damage to morale are growing as the gap widens between the lofty words and the reality on the ground. Renewal of deterrent capability? Before that, we will do well to renew creativity and clarify of thought, which have become rusty underneath the layers of gibberish.
The knee-jerk dancers
Never mind the deja-vu of the feelings of tension and the pit in the stomach or, alternatively, the outbursts of revenge, which provide a moment's pleasure that accompany the flare-up of every new round of war here. All this is already part of our world and of the mental makeup of everyone who grows up in this country. The really oppressive thing, which is harder and harder to get used to with each new round, is the automatic reaction that accompanies it, like a boring ritual. After all, without any connection to the geopolitical or other circumstances of the war, we can predict the joy of the right wing's We told you so, which attributes everything to Oslo and demands that the IDF be allowed (once again?) to win, if only for the sake of the bashing itself (Netanyahu: Make mincemeat out of them!).Furthermore, we can also guess in advance the reflexive reaction of the peace camp, which in the inertia of its opposition each time to the use of force by Israel, no longer differentiates between declamations of occupation and the legitimate need to rid ourselves of subjugation to the threats and caprices of a Khomeini-ist bridgehead, which has leeched on to our carotid artery and challenges our very existence. In fact, those who advocate withdrawal to the last centimeter of the Green Line should be the first to leap, lion-like, to the defense of the sanctity of Israeli sovereignty; and not only vis-a-vis Hezbollah and Hamas, but also their patrons and inciters, the Syrians and the Iranians. But is it possible to imagine any military operation even one that is meant to underscore the Green Line without the automatic blessing of the settlers and the left's End the Occupation demonstration? People like to quote Henry Kissinger's remark that Israel has no foreign policy, only a domestic policy. But Kissinger was wrong. We don't have a domestic policy, either only reflexes and old habits.
The true spider-wed
How powerful is the rhetoric of Nasrallah, Saddam Hussein and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: Each of their metaphors ?(We will turn Israelinto a dry branch) is engraved in our consciousness more than 100 neo-Churchillean speeches of our prime minister, which were written by a committee of advisors, ad-men and spinners. Or may be it isn't so much their rhetorical power as it is our traumas. A case in point is Nasrallah's spider-web speech, which gives us no rest. And because each of Israel's wars is intended to heal thetraumas of the one before, and based on our mystical belief inwords especially those of our enemies it is no wonder that the military operation has been referred to as Webs of Steel. But Nasrallah and Saddam were right. No, not about the staying power and resilience of the national home about the staying power and resilience of the physical home. In other words, with respect to the quality of construction in Israel. It is here, in the contracting and planning shoddiness, that the true spider-webs of the home front exist, exposed anew in every war: thin walls, which if not for theair conditioner stuck in them from the outside to act as a counterweight to the plasma screen hanging on them from the inside, would turn into a heap of cinder blocks at the very sound of an air-raid siren; neighborhoods consisting of houses of cards which, wereit not for the security rooms on which they are grounded, would collapse by themselves; and ceilings that peel and flake even at the sound of fireworks and thunder. We don't need the IDF to prove that we are not teetering or temporary we need a good contractor.
Four words
The gist of Israel's foreign and defense policy in four words (while pedaling on a bike with training wheels): Look, Condy: nohands!
Actori neputinciosi intr-o tragedie clasica.
Sa incep cu finalul, la sfarsitul ostilitatilor sau razboiului actual, ambele parti combatante vor declara victorie. Aranjamentul care se pregateste ia in considerare acest fapt, si incearca sa-l potriveasca in asa fel incat aceste declaratii sa fie posibile.
Pentru moment, unii comentatori considera ca Israelul nu are incotro, el trebuie, by hook and by crook sa iasa invingator din conflict. Cum invingator, aici nu este prea clar.
Razboiul scoate in evidenta, pentru un necunoscator ca mine, neasteptata putere atat militara dar cu mult mai surprinzator, politica a Hisb’allah-ului. Daca la un sondaj de opinie mai mult de 50% din populatia crestina si cca 40% din populatia druza sustin actiunea ostila a Hib’allah-ului, Libanul este pe departe altceva decat credeam eu inainte de declansarea ostilitatilor. 90% din populatia shiita, 53% crestini, 40% druzi impreuna, majoritate libaneza clara sunt pentru razboiul cu Israelul, razboiul se arata deci a fi un razboi Israel- Liban, si trebuie tratat ca atare. Desigur ca in spatele combatantilor stau forte si interese straine, desigur ca acest razboi este inca un episod dintr-un razboi mondial care , vrem nu vrem , ia amploare.
Pentru Israel, acest razboi este inca un razboi pentru insasi existenta statului, asemenea celor din 48, 67 si 73. Marea diferenta, la bine si la rau, este ca acest razboi este , deocamdata doar un episod, din razboiul pentru existenta al lumii democrate, luminate , civilizate si indestulate…
Israelul nu-si poate permite deci sa piarda acest razboi. In principiu lumea civilizata si indestulata trebuie sa-l castige deasemenea. Diferenta dintre noi si ei , diferenta esentiala, este ca pentru noi actuala conflagratie este un razboi pentru existenta, in schimb pentru ei poate aparea doar ca o batalie dintr-un razboi de mai lunga durata, care poate fi, eventual, pierduta.
In momentul de fata sunt doua alternative :a. un aranjament in care cele doua parti vor putea declara victorie, cu alte cuvinte noi ne salvam doar aparent fata, pierdem insa de fapt razboiul, obtinem inca un armistitiu inconcludent, vestul imbelsugat rasufla usurat si amana inclestarea finala, care , calcule “matematice” simple arata ca este inevitabila.
Si b. largirea conflictului si transformarea lui intr-un razboi de mari proportii, cu Iranul si Siria , razboi pe care vestul imbelsugat nu si-l doreste si mi-e frica ca nu este capabil sa-l poarte.
Peste x ani de zile, printre ruinele si cenusa care vor ramane in urma ultimei batalii ale acestui al treilea sau al patrulea razboi mondial, cei care vor ramane in viata si capabili sa-si aduca aminte, vor spune : ce bine ar fi fost daca am fi dus aceasta ultima batalie acum x ani de zile…
Suntem martorii unei tragedii clasice. Cunoastem finalul, cunoastem si vointa zeilor si suntem neputinciosi.deD
Pentru moment, unii comentatori considera ca Israelul nu are incotro, el trebuie, by hook and by crook sa iasa invingator din conflict. Cum invingator, aici nu este prea clar.
Razboiul scoate in evidenta, pentru un necunoscator ca mine, neasteptata putere atat militara dar cu mult mai surprinzator, politica a Hisb’allah-ului. Daca la un sondaj de opinie mai mult de 50% din populatia crestina si cca 40% din populatia druza sustin actiunea ostila a Hib’allah-ului, Libanul este pe departe altceva decat credeam eu inainte de declansarea ostilitatilor. 90% din populatia shiita, 53% crestini, 40% druzi impreuna, majoritate libaneza clara sunt pentru razboiul cu Israelul, razboiul se arata deci a fi un razboi Israel- Liban, si trebuie tratat ca atare. Desigur ca in spatele combatantilor stau forte si interese straine, desigur ca acest razboi este inca un episod dintr-un razboi mondial care , vrem nu vrem , ia amploare.
Pentru Israel, acest razboi este inca un razboi pentru insasi existenta statului, asemenea celor din 48, 67 si 73. Marea diferenta, la bine si la rau, este ca acest razboi este , deocamdata doar un episod, din razboiul pentru existenta al lumii democrate, luminate , civilizate si indestulate…
Israelul nu-si poate permite deci sa piarda acest razboi. In principiu lumea civilizata si indestulata trebuie sa-l castige deasemenea. Diferenta dintre noi si ei , diferenta esentiala, este ca pentru noi actuala conflagratie este un razboi pentru existenta, in schimb pentru ei poate aparea doar ca o batalie dintr-un razboi de mai lunga durata, care poate fi, eventual, pierduta.
In momentul de fata sunt doua alternative :a. un aranjament in care cele doua parti vor putea declara victorie, cu alte cuvinte noi ne salvam doar aparent fata, pierdem insa de fapt razboiul, obtinem inca un armistitiu inconcludent, vestul imbelsugat rasufla usurat si amana inclestarea finala, care , calcule “matematice” simple arata ca este inevitabila.
Si b. largirea conflictului si transformarea lui intr-un razboi de mari proportii, cu Iranul si Siria , razboi pe care vestul imbelsugat nu si-l doreste si mi-e frica ca nu este capabil sa-l poarte.
Peste x ani de zile, printre ruinele si cenusa care vor ramane in urma ultimei batalii ale acestui al treilea sau al patrulea razboi mondial, cei care vor ramane in viata si capabili sa-si aduca aminte, vor spune : ce bine ar fi fost daca am fi dus aceasta ultima batalie acum x ani de zile…
Suntem martorii unei tragedii clasice. Cunoastem finalul, cunoastem si vointa zeilor si suntem neputinciosi.deD
Thursday, July 27, 2006
Restaurantul Monte Carlo din Cismigiu
Asa arata restaurantul Monte Carlo din gradina Cismigiu, inainte de bombardamentul american din 1944. Din pacate constructia lui, opera arhitectului Mincu, nu a fost restaurata dupa planurile originale.Bucurestiul este una dintre cele mai distruse capitale ale Europei: cutremure, razboi si megalomanie comunista. A sosit acuma randul euroiului.
Hopaaa!!! Good Morning al-Qaida!
By WILLA THAYER, Associated Press Writer 40 minutes ago
CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Qaida's No. 2 leader issued a worldwide call Thursday for Muslims to rise up in a holy war against
Israel'
In the message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahri, second in command to
Osama bin Laden, said that al-Qaida now views "all the world as a battlefield open in front of us."
The Egyptian-born physician said that the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah and Palestinian militants would not be ended with "cease-fires or agreements."
"It is a jihad (holy war) for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahri said. "We will attack everywhere." Spain was controlled by Arab Muslims for more than seven centuries until they were driven from power in 1492.
He said Arab regimes were accomplices to Israel. "My fellow Muslims, it is obvious that Arab and Islamic governments are not only impotent but also complicit ... and you are alone on the battlefield. Rely on God and fight your enemies ... make yourselves martyrs."
He also called for the "downtrodden" throughout the world, not just Muslims, to join the battle against "tyrannical Western civilization and its leader, America."
"Stand with Muslims in confronting this unprecedented oppression and tyranny. Stand with us as we stand with you against this injustice that was forbidden by God in his book (the Quran)," al-Zawahri said.
Kamal Habib, a former member of Egypt's Islamic Jihad militant group who was jailed from 1981 to 1991 along with al-Zawahri, said the al-Qaida No. 2's outreach to Shiites and non-Muslims was unprecedented and reflected a major change in tactics.
"This is a transformation in the vision of al-Qaida and its struggle with the United States. It is now trying to unite Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and calling for non-Muslims to join the fight," he said.
Al-Zawahri wore a gray robe and white turban in the video. A picture of the burning World Trade Center was on the wall behind him along with photos of two other militants. One appeared to be a bearded Mohamed Atta, the Egyptian ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks. The other was Mohammed Atef, also known as Abu Hafs al-Masri, a former top lieutenant of bin Laden who was killed in a U.S. airstrike in
Afghanistan in November 2001.
The Arab satellite station did not transmit the entire tape, using instead selected quotes interspersed with commentary from an anchor.
An Al-Jazeera official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters said the full tape was about eight minutes long. The satellite channel aired only about half the message. It would not say how it received the tape.
"The shells and rockets ripping apart Muslim bodies in Gaza and Lebanon are not only Israeli (weapons), but are supplied by all the countries of the crusader coalition. Therefore, every participant in the crime will pay the price," al-Zawahri said.
"We cannot just watch these shells as they burn our brothers in Gaza and Lebanon and stand by idly, humiliated," he added.
The message was al-Zawahri's 10th this year. Bin Laden has issued five messages in a particularly active year of messages from the top al-Qaida leadership.
Al-Zawahri last appeared in a video posted on an Islamic Web site on the first anniversary of the train bombings in London. In the July 7 tape, he said two of the four suicide bombers in London had spent time in an al-Qaida training camp, preparing themselves for a suicide mission.
The two top al-Qaida leaders also paid tribute in June to the slain leader of their Iraq network, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in separate recordings. Many of their messages this year have dealt with current events in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia.
Another new audio or video message from bin Laden had also expected in the past week on the fighting in Gaza and Lebanon, according to IntelCenter, a U.S.-based independent group that provides counterterrorism information to the U.S. government and media. However, no messages have appeared on Islamic Web sites to announce the release.
Al-Zawahri said Muslims everywhere must rise up to attack "crusaders and Zionists" and support jihad "until American troops are chased from Afghanistan and Iraq, paralyzed and impotent ... having paid the price for aggression against Muslims and support for Israel."
Israel began an offensive on Gaza days after Palestinian militants captured an Israeli soldier on June 25. It opened a second front in Lebanon after Hezbollah guerillas killed eight Israeli soldiers and captured two others on July 12.
CAIRO, Egypt - Al-Qaida's No. 2 leader issued a worldwide call Thursday for Muslims to rise up in a holy war against
Israel'
In the message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahri, second in command to
Osama bin Laden, said that al-Qaida now views "all the world as a battlefield open in front of us."
The Egyptian-born physician said that the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah and Palestinian militants would not be ended with "cease-fires or agreements."
"It is a jihad (holy war) for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahri said. "We will attack everywhere." Spain was controlled by Arab Muslims for more than seven centuries until they were driven from power in 1492.
He said Arab regimes were accomplices to Israel. "My fellow Muslims, it is obvious that Arab and Islamic governments are not only impotent but also complicit ... and you are alone on the battlefield. Rely on God and fight your enemies ... make yourselves martyrs."
He also called for the "downtrodden" throughout the world, not just Muslims, to join the battle against "tyrannical Western civilization and its leader, America."
"Stand with Muslims in confronting this unprecedented oppression and tyranny. Stand with us as we stand with you against this injustice that was forbidden by God in his book (the Quran)," al-Zawahri said.
Kamal Habib, a former member of Egypt's Islamic Jihad militant group who was jailed from 1981 to 1991 along with al-Zawahri, said the al-Qaida No. 2's outreach to Shiites and non-Muslims was unprecedented and reflected a major change in tactics.
"This is a transformation in the vision of al-Qaida and its struggle with the United States. It is now trying to unite Sunni Muslims, Shiite Muslims and calling for non-Muslims to join the fight," he said.
Al-Zawahri wore a gray robe and white turban in the video. A picture of the burning World Trade Center was on the wall behind him along with photos of two other militants. One appeared to be a bearded Mohamed Atta, the Egyptian ringleader of the Sept. 11 attacks. The other was Mohammed Atef, also known as Abu Hafs al-Masri, a former top lieutenant of bin Laden who was killed in a U.S. airstrike in
Afghanistan in November 2001.
The Arab satellite station did not transmit the entire tape, using instead selected quotes interspersed with commentary from an anchor.
An Al-Jazeera official speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to reporters said the full tape was about eight minutes long. The satellite channel aired only about half the message. It would not say how it received the tape.
"The shells and rockets ripping apart Muslim bodies in Gaza and Lebanon are not only Israeli (weapons), but are supplied by all the countries of the crusader coalition. Therefore, every participant in the crime will pay the price," al-Zawahri said.
"We cannot just watch these shells as they burn our brothers in Gaza and Lebanon and stand by idly, humiliated," he added.
The message was al-Zawahri's 10th this year. Bin Laden has issued five messages in a particularly active year of messages from the top al-Qaida leadership.
Al-Zawahri last appeared in a video posted on an Islamic Web site on the first anniversary of the train bombings in London. In the July 7 tape, he said two of the four suicide bombers in London had spent time in an al-Qaida training camp, preparing themselves for a suicide mission.
The two top al-Qaida leaders also paid tribute in June to the slain leader of their Iraq network, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in separate recordings. Many of their messages this year have dealt with current events in Afghanistan, Iraq and Somalia.
Another new audio or video message from bin Laden had also expected in the past week on the fighting in Gaza and Lebanon, according to IntelCenter, a U.S.-based independent group that provides counterterrorism information to the U.S. government and media. However, no messages have appeared on Islamic Web sites to announce the release.
Al-Zawahri said Muslims everywhere must rise up to attack "crusaders and Zionists" and support jihad "until American troops are chased from Afghanistan and Iraq, paralyzed and impotent ... having paid the price for aggression against Muslims and support for Israel."
Israel began an offensive on Gaza days after Palestinian militants captured an Israeli soldier on June 25. It opened a second front in Lebanon after Hezbollah guerillas killed eight Israeli soldiers and captured two others on July 12.
Great Syria on its way....
Last update - 06:24 27/07/2006
(from Ha-Aretz)
ANALYSIS: The U.S. may have to resume talks with Syria
By Shmuel Rosner
WASHINGTON - Everyone knows that Israel's Lebanon wishlist will not be met in its entirety. A number of the concessions that Israel will presumably have to agree to in the days and weeks to come have already been leaked from the various and sundry diplomatic talks being held in Beirut, Jerusalem and Rome. Hezbollah will not be disarmed, at least not in the short term. Any international force to be deployed in Lebanon will serve as little more than a buffer force along the border. The likelihood of its remaining there depends largely on the goodwill of Hezbollah, and perhaps that of Syria and Iran, too. It is similarly unlikely that Israel's kidnapped soldiers will be returned without at least a token release of prisoners.
But it is the Shaba Farms that will pose one of the greatest problems for Israel. Israel recognizes that it is not its territory and ostensibly should not find it hard to hand over the keys, but conceding the area to the Lebanese government, or to a committee that will decide whether to give it to Lebanon or to Syria, will be presented as another Hezbollah victory. The Americans, too, know this. Nevertheless, Shaba Farms is on the table because Lebanon asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to put it there, and for the time being Lebanese requests carry a lot of weight. The U.S. paid a high price in terms of its international image for its near-unconditional support of Israel's campaign, for which it will demand painful concessions for the sake of maintaining the stability of the Lebanese government.
The U.S. realizes that Israel will probably not succeed in destroying Hezbollah's infrastructure in Lebanon. It hopes that strengthening the government in Beirut will eventually enable that regime to get the job done, but is not counting on it. "Right now Hezbollah is not disarmed, and to hold off as the precondition for deployment of [an international] force.. is to create a precondition that cannot be met," Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs David Welch said Wednesday while flying with Rice from Israel to Rome. "So let's be realistic about this," Welch counseled. In other words, the time for making big promises is over, now is the time for negotiations.
And if there are to be negotiations, then it is more than likely that the Americans will also have to pay a price. Just as the U.S. was forced to take a new tack with regard to Iran, now it may have to resume talks with Syria. That would be a very bitter pill to swallow, especially for Pentagon officials, but there are already signs that they are getting ready to do so. The argument in favor of reopening the dialogue with Syria says this is the only way to reassure Lebanon and Hezbollah and to ensure the welfare of the international force in the making.
Further, an agreement with Syria would isolate Iran and create a buffer between Iran and Lebanon. In addition, it would be a pity not to exploit the fact that Syria has no connection, either ideological or religious, to the Shi'ite revolution. But the most decisive argument in favor of talking with Damascus could be a public-relations argument: The U.S. administration is finding it increasingly harder to explain its refusal to talk to Syria. According to one U.S. official, the government has few tools left for dealing with Syrian President Bashar Assad, and in the absence of an attractive plan for waging war against it, the only thing left is jaw-jaw rather than war-war.
(from Ha-Aretz)
ANALYSIS: The U.S. may have to resume talks with Syria
By Shmuel Rosner
WASHINGTON - Everyone knows that Israel's Lebanon wishlist will not be met in its entirety. A number of the concessions that Israel will presumably have to agree to in the days and weeks to come have already been leaked from the various and sundry diplomatic talks being held in Beirut, Jerusalem and Rome. Hezbollah will not be disarmed, at least not in the short term. Any international force to be deployed in Lebanon will serve as little more than a buffer force along the border. The likelihood of its remaining there depends largely on the goodwill of Hezbollah, and perhaps that of Syria and Iran, too. It is similarly unlikely that Israel's kidnapped soldiers will be returned without at least a token release of prisoners.
But it is the Shaba Farms that will pose one of the greatest problems for Israel. Israel recognizes that it is not its territory and ostensibly should not find it hard to hand over the keys, but conceding the area to the Lebanese government, or to a committee that will decide whether to give it to Lebanon or to Syria, will be presented as another Hezbollah victory. The Americans, too, know this. Nevertheless, Shaba Farms is on the table because Lebanon asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to put it there, and for the time being Lebanese requests carry a lot of weight. The U.S. paid a high price in terms of its international image for its near-unconditional support of Israel's campaign, for which it will demand painful concessions for the sake of maintaining the stability of the Lebanese government.
The U.S. realizes that Israel will probably not succeed in destroying Hezbollah's infrastructure in Lebanon. It hopes that strengthening the government in Beirut will eventually enable that regime to get the job done, but is not counting on it. "Right now Hezbollah is not disarmed, and to hold off as the precondition for deployment of [an international] force.. is to create a precondition that cannot be met," Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs David Welch said Wednesday while flying with Rice from Israel to Rome. "So let's be realistic about this," Welch counseled. In other words, the time for making big promises is over, now is the time for negotiations.
And if there are to be negotiations, then it is more than likely that the Americans will also have to pay a price. Just as the U.S. was forced to take a new tack with regard to Iran, now it may have to resume talks with Syria. That would be a very bitter pill to swallow, especially for Pentagon officials, but there are already signs that they are getting ready to do so. The argument in favor of reopening the dialogue with Syria says this is the only way to reassure Lebanon and Hezbollah and to ensure the welfare of the international force in the making.
Further, an agreement with Syria would isolate Iran and create a buffer between Iran and Lebanon. In addition, it would be a pity not to exploit the fact that Syria has no connection, either ideological or religious, to the Shi'ite revolution. But the most decisive argument in favor of talking with Damascus could be a public-relations argument: The U.S. administration is finding it increasingly harder to explain its refusal to talk to Syria. According to one U.S. official, the government has few tools left for dealing with Syrian President Bashar Assad, and in the absence of an attractive plan for waging war against it, the only thing left is jaw-jaw rather than war-war.
A message from prince Hassan, late King Hussein's brother.
Waging war or winning peace
By HRH Prince Hassan bin Talal
Once again, the region rings with the all-too-familiar cries of hatred, anger, violence and bloodshed. It seems we have been rendered unable to disable violence whether the perpetrators be state or non-state players. Where is the voice of reason or the eye that sees beyond the immediate? Where is the ear that is prepared to listen?
Only last September, at the UN World Summit, world leaders agreed in a historic statement that states have a primary responsibility to act to protect their own populations and that the international community has a responsibility to act when these governments fail to protect the most vulnerable among us. Yet what we are witnessing today in Lebanon, in Palestine, in Iraq and in Afghanistan is no less than the punishment of the powerless, escalating humanitarian crises of mammoth proportions, coupled in Lebanon with the destruction of the very infrastructure of civilized existence.
We are a dishonest lot in the Middle East. Maddened by grievances real and perceived, each of us clamors to call for peace when we have all, through trauma and intransigence, become mesmerized by war. We may fool our media allies from far away, or fulfill the requirements of sloganeers who do not share our air and soil, but we know, you and I, that lasting peace will only come when we look each other in the eye and translate hatred into words that begin a difficult conversation.
The people of Israel have made an easy decision not to talk to extremists. Perhaps the bravest step is to engage with moderates and acknowledge that our troubled neighborhood needs the courage of compassion and the wisdom of longer-term self-interest to undo the damage of macho militarism. The gunfire around us makes it even harder to hear the voices of our marginalized communities.
Honesty is the only way to save our grandchildren from the fear and asphyxiation of hope, which we have all known for so long. Our clustered cities of Amman and Tel Aviv, Beirut and Damascus are too close to each other to avoid a tangled future. We, the Children of Abraham, may claim to look in different directions for culture and custom, spirituality and succor, but this small patch of scorched, embattled earth cannot be divided by fences and false borders of the mind. If the political play does not allow us to admit this to those whose map of our region is distorted by self-interest and misguided strategic obstinacy, then at least let us have the sense to admit it to each other.
Enlightened self-interest must compel us to foster human dignity and integrity by addressing the full spectrum of basic human rights, spanning from the rights of children to full respect for the rule of law on a national, regional and international level. The events of the past three weeks have brought us to the edge of the abyss. They are the result not of timeless and inevitable conflict, but of intransigence, fear and a shocking lack of creativity by leaders in our region and beyond. The indiscriminate loss of life on all sides has polarized our populations and shown diplomacy for the devalued and scorned art it has become. The focus on polemics and the ensuing escalation of violence has sidelined the very real and dangerous concerns that underlie our region's spiraling decline.
Aggressive ideology is nurtured by an increasing lack of economic equality, poor social mobility, a denial to many of human security, and the exclusion of the silenced majority. It is evident to us all that military might cannot cure the evils of our region. Violence begets violence, and the mass bombings of civilians can only result in increased use of terror tactics further down the line.
It has become exceedingly clear that the current crisis requires the application of a two-fold solution if we are ever to hope for a secure and stable peace for all our citizens. The conflicts that rule our daily lives must be addressed on the political level, but we cannot afford to ignore the effects of military overkill on basic humanitarian issues.
Human rights are the first casualties of war, and the degradation of human dignity in our region has undone generations of agreement and convention on the rights of civilians to protection and well-being. The anger and trauma created by hundreds of dead and injured and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians so far can only have violent repercussions for a hitherto democratic, pluralistic and multicultural Lebanon reality. The shockwaves are felt by our entire region.
A conference for security and cooperation in the region must be a priority for our leaders if human security is ever to become a reality. Diplomatic avenues must be opened and explored, and this arduous process should include Syria and Iran. War and it's tragic repercussions are inclusive of all; surely a model for peace should strive for such inclusiveness. In memory of my late brother, His Majesty King Hussein, and Yitzhak Rabin, we must strive not to wage wars, but to win peace. Real peace must be built; it is not just the absence of war. We need to talk about the end-game, to develop regional understanding, to address the energy issue that is at the heart of so much instability, and to devise a multilateral approach to such thorny issues as the proliferation of WMD, together with a regional concept for human rights, prosperity and security. Ideally, it could lead to a regional code of conduct and a cohesion fund that establishes principles of common interest, responsibility, transparency and a collective defense identity, reflecting the fact that interdependency is the reality today.
Anthrocentric policies, policies where people matter, is the way to close the human dignity divide. Through good governance, we must empower the poor and dispossessed who find expression for their frustrations in extremist ideology. The sooner a cessation of hostilities is achieved and international peacekeeping forces are deployed on both sides of the border, the sooner a collective strive toward institutionalized regional stability can begin. I cannot emphasize enough the need for diplomacy to transpose violence and this call echoes former U.S. president Eisenhower's appeal that the stable, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
The writer, brother of the late King Hussein of Jordan, is president of the Arab Thought Forum.
By HRH Prince Hassan bin Talal
Once again, the region rings with the all-too-familiar cries of hatred, anger, violence and bloodshed. It seems we have been rendered unable to disable violence whether the perpetrators be state or non-state players. Where is the voice of reason or the eye that sees beyond the immediate? Where is the ear that is prepared to listen?
Only last September, at the UN World Summit, world leaders agreed in a historic statement that states have a primary responsibility to act to protect their own populations and that the international community has a responsibility to act when these governments fail to protect the most vulnerable among us. Yet what we are witnessing today in Lebanon, in Palestine, in Iraq and in Afghanistan is no less than the punishment of the powerless, escalating humanitarian crises of mammoth proportions, coupled in Lebanon with the destruction of the very infrastructure of civilized existence.
We are a dishonest lot in the Middle East. Maddened by grievances real and perceived, each of us clamors to call for peace when we have all, through trauma and intransigence, become mesmerized by war. We may fool our media allies from far away, or fulfill the requirements of sloganeers who do not share our air and soil, but we know, you and I, that lasting peace will only come when we look each other in the eye and translate hatred into words that begin a difficult conversation.
The people of Israel have made an easy decision not to talk to extremists. Perhaps the bravest step is to engage with moderates and acknowledge that our troubled neighborhood needs the courage of compassion and the wisdom of longer-term self-interest to undo the damage of macho militarism. The gunfire around us makes it even harder to hear the voices of our marginalized communities.
Honesty is the only way to save our grandchildren from the fear and asphyxiation of hope, which we have all known for so long. Our clustered cities of Amman and Tel Aviv, Beirut and Damascus are too close to each other to avoid a tangled future. We, the Children of Abraham, may claim to look in different directions for culture and custom, spirituality and succor, but this small patch of scorched, embattled earth cannot be divided by fences and false borders of the mind. If the political play does not allow us to admit this to those whose map of our region is distorted by self-interest and misguided strategic obstinacy, then at least let us have the sense to admit it to each other.
Enlightened self-interest must compel us to foster human dignity and integrity by addressing the full spectrum of basic human rights, spanning from the rights of children to full respect for the rule of law on a national, regional and international level. The events of the past three weeks have brought us to the edge of the abyss. They are the result not of timeless and inevitable conflict, but of intransigence, fear and a shocking lack of creativity by leaders in our region and beyond. The indiscriminate loss of life on all sides has polarized our populations and shown diplomacy for the devalued and scorned art it has become. The focus on polemics and the ensuing escalation of violence has sidelined the very real and dangerous concerns that underlie our region's spiraling decline.
Aggressive ideology is nurtured by an increasing lack of economic equality, poor social mobility, a denial to many of human security, and the exclusion of the silenced majority. It is evident to us all that military might cannot cure the evils of our region. Violence begets violence, and the mass bombings of civilians can only result in increased use of terror tactics further down the line.
It has become exceedingly clear that the current crisis requires the application of a two-fold solution if we are ever to hope for a secure and stable peace for all our citizens. The conflicts that rule our daily lives must be addressed on the political level, but we cannot afford to ignore the effects of military overkill on basic humanitarian issues.
Human rights are the first casualties of war, and the degradation of human dignity in our region has undone generations of agreement and convention on the rights of civilians to protection and well-being. The anger and trauma created by hundreds of dead and injured and the displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians so far can only have violent repercussions for a hitherto democratic, pluralistic and multicultural Lebanon reality. The shockwaves are felt by our entire region.
A conference for security and cooperation in the region must be a priority for our leaders if human security is ever to become a reality. Diplomatic avenues must be opened and explored, and this arduous process should include Syria and Iran. War and it's tragic repercussions are inclusive of all; surely a model for peace should strive for such inclusiveness. In memory of my late brother, His Majesty King Hussein, and Yitzhak Rabin, we must strive not to wage wars, but to win peace. Real peace must be built; it is not just the absence of war. We need to talk about the end-game, to develop regional understanding, to address the energy issue that is at the heart of so much instability, and to devise a multilateral approach to such thorny issues as the proliferation of WMD, together with a regional concept for human rights, prosperity and security. Ideally, it could lead to a regional code of conduct and a cohesion fund that establishes principles of common interest, responsibility, transparency and a collective defense identity, reflecting the fact that interdependency is the reality today.
Anthrocentric policies, policies where people matter, is the way to close the human dignity divide. Through good governance, we must empower the poor and dispossessed who find expression for their frustrations in extremist ideology. The sooner a cessation of hostilities is achieved and international peacekeeping forces are deployed on both sides of the border, the sooner a collective strive toward institutionalized regional stability can begin. I cannot emphasize enough the need for diplomacy to transpose violence and this call echoes former U.S. president Eisenhower's appeal that the stable, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
The writer, brother of the late King Hussein of Jordan, is president of the Arab Thought Forum.
Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Fashion in Romania
Cineva a trimis aceasta fotografie ilustrand moda romaneasca.Moda pe cinste, domnule! Cunosc o multime de gagici care si-ar cumpara un costum cum are doamna din poza.
Dar.... n-are nici de unde si n-are nici cum.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Dupa doua saptamani de razboi, destul cu Libanul!
Se implinesc astazi doua saptamani de razboi. Douasprezece zile "le-am pierdut" "petrecandu-le" in Romania. Vad ca ma capatat un stil la care am nevoie de ghilimele la fiaecare doua vorbe.Nimeni nu are vre-un interes special ca razboiul sa se termine, inafara de parintii, sotiile si copiii soldatilor care sunt pe front.
Razboiul dintre Vest si tarile "axei raului" adica Iran si Siria(Coreea de Nord este reprezentata de tehnologia rachetelor iraniene),este purtat de soldatii nostri in fata fortelor bine infipte in pamant ale Hisb'Allah. In ciuda bombardamentelor masive si de cateva zile a prezentei -inca redusa relativ- ale fortelor terestre, nordul tarii este bombardat intensiv cu rachete, victime multe si o zona foarte intinsa paralizata economic, cu populatia in adaposturi.
Se joaca aici un joc important, este o batalie dintr-un razboi mondial, oricat ne-am speria sa-l declaram mondial, el are toate caracteristicile unei confruntari la scara mapamondului. Cand se va termina? Cand unchiul Sam va decide ca tunurile trebuie sa taca.
Unchiul Sam insa, nu se grabeste, militarii nostri cer timp, guvernul se bazeaza pe un anumit consens national care pare ca rezista ...deocamdata. Situatia pare fara de iesire. Libanul nu are armata, areun fel de adunatura de terchea-berchea fripturisti, apartinand diverselor grupuri etnice libaneze, tarile NATO sau altele cu armate serioase nu doresc sa-si trimita soldatii pe un front unde se si mierleste, iar Israelul nu doreste o forta multinationala care sa-i pazeasca granita, s-ar creea un precedent periculos. Asa ca deocamdata se joaca berbunca, sau daca e sa traducem acest joc practicat de puscariasi in cuvinte mai bla^nde, este jocul in care acela care clipeste primul, pierde potul.
Ierusalimul pe care l-am lasat in urma acum doua saptamani era plin de veselie si turisti, regretam zilele de razboi caci atunci nu sunt prezente autocarele turistilor care fac circulatia imposibila. Am capatat ce mi-am dorit . Se circul mai usor prin oras!...
Este nevoie de o gandire originala. Vin si eu cu o propunere, doar pentru mine personal. O impartasesc pe blog, si aici e un loc pentru idei traznite .Razboiul este rezultatul faptului ca Libanul reprezinta o entitate artificiala, mostenire coloniala. Trecand peste multe amanunte, as sacrifica Libanul, cedandu-l Siriei, as incheia cu Siria o intelegere definitiva de pace, inclusiv negocierea Golanului, si as avea o granita asigurata nu prin intermediari ci direct cu sirienii. In felul acesta i-as desparti pe sirieni de aliatii lor de circumstanta, iranienii, pe care i-as lasa cu mare bucurie pe mana unchilui Sam, despre care am mai vorbit.
"-Ce faci aici iepurasule, intreba Leul. Am auzit ca te lauzi la toatalumea ca te duci sa regulezi leoaica!
-Stau aici (iepurasul sprijinit de copac si lustruindu-si unghiile),stau aici si vorbesc prostii."
Razboiul dintre Vest si tarile "axei raului" adica Iran si Siria(Coreea de Nord este reprezentata de tehnologia rachetelor iraniene),este purtat de soldatii nostri in fata fortelor bine infipte in pamant ale Hisb'Allah. In ciuda bombardamentelor masive si de cateva zile a prezentei -inca redusa relativ- ale fortelor terestre, nordul tarii este bombardat intensiv cu rachete, victime multe si o zona foarte intinsa paralizata economic, cu populatia in adaposturi.
Se joaca aici un joc important, este o batalie dintr-un razboi mondial, oricat ne-am speria sa-l declaram mondial, el are toate caracteristicile unei confruntari la scara mapamondului. Cand se va termina? Cand unchiul Sam va decide ca tunurile trebuie sa taca.
Unchiul Sam insa, nu se grabeste, militarii nostri cer timp, guvernul se bazeaza pe un anumit consens national care pare ca rezista ...deocamdata. Situatia pare fara de iesire. Libanul nu are armata, areun fel de adunatura de terchea-berchea fripturisti, apartinand diverselor grupuri etnice libaneze, tarile NATO sau altele cu armate serioase nu doresc sa-si trimita soldatii pe un front unde se si mierleste, iar Israelul nu doreste o forta multinationala care sa-i pazeasca granita, s-ar creea un precedent periculos. Asa ca deocamdata se joaca berbunca, sau daca e sa traducem acest joc practicat de puscariasi in cuvinte mai bla^nde, este jocul in care acela care clipeste primul, pierde potul.
Ierusalimul pe care l-am lasat in urma acum doua saptamani era plin de veselie si turisti, regretam zilele de razboi caci atunci nu sunt prezente autocarele turistilor care fac circulatia imposibila. Am capatat ce mi-am dorit . Se circul mai usor prin oras!...
Este nevoie de o gandire originala. Vin si eu cu o propunere, doar pentru mine personal. O impartasesc pe blog, si aici e un loc pentru idei traznite .Razboiul este rezultatul faptului ca Libanul reprezinta o entitate artificiala, mostenire coloniala. Trecand peste multe amanunte, as sacrifica Libanul, cedandu-l Siriei, as incheia cu Siria o intelegere definitiva de pace, inclusiv negocierea Golanului, si as avea o granita asigurata nu prin intermediari ci direct cu sirienii. In felul acesta i-as desparti pe sirieni de aliatii lor de circumstanta, iranienii, pe care i-as lasa cu mare bucurie pe mana unchilui Sam, despre care am mai vorbit.
"-Ce faci aici iepurasule, intreba Leul. Am auzit ca te lauzi la toatalumea ca te duci sa regulezi leoaica!
-Stau aici (iepurasul sprijinit de copac si lustruindu-si unghiile),stau aici si vorbesc prostii."
La placinte inainte, la razboi inapoi!
U.S. and NATO Balk on Troops for Lebanon Force
By ELAINE SCIOLINO and STEVEN ERLANGER
Published: July 25, 2006
PARIS, July 24 — Support is building quickly for an international military force to be placed in southern Lebanon, but there remains a small problem: where will the troops come from?
Skip to next paragraph
The United States has ruled out its soldiers’ participating, NATO says it is overstretched, Britain feels its troops are overcommitted and Germany says it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development.
“All the politicians are saying, ‘Great, great’ to the idea of a force, but no one is saying whose soldiers will be on the ground,” said one senior European official. “Everyone will volunteer to be in charge of the logistics in Cyprus.”
There has been strong verbal support for such a force in public, but also private concerns that soldiers would be seen as allied to Israel and would have to fight Hezbollah guerrillas who do not want foreigners, let alone the Lebanese Army, coming between them and the Israelis.
There is also the burden of history. France — which has called the idea of a force premature — and the United States are haunted by their last participation in a multinational force in Lebanon, after the Israeli invasion in 1982, when they became belligerents in the Lebanese civil war and tangled fatally with Hezbollah.
They withdrew in defeat after Hezbollah’s suicide bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983, which killed 241 American service members and 58 French paratroopers.
Israel’s own public position toward an international force has been welcoming, but skeptical, insisting that it be capable of military missions, not just peacekeeping.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert suggested that the force could be made up of soldiers from both European and Arab states, while his defense minister, Amir Peretz, spoke of soldiers from NATO countries.
But Israel senses no great willingness among leading European countries to take part, and Israeli officials emphasize that they will not accept an end to hostilities until clear policy goals are met.
For the moment, at least, Israel is laying out an ambitious, if perhaps unrealistic, view of what the force would do. Israel wants it to keep Hezbollah away from the border, allow the Lebanese government and army to take control over all of its territory, and monitor Lebanon’s borders to ensure that Hezbollah is not resupplied with weapons.
Israel’s foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, laid out the goals in a meeting on Sunday with senior officials of the British, German and French governments. Ms. Livni told them that Israel’s goal was to disarm Hezbollah and that either the Israeli Army or an international force would have to do it, said officials from those four countries who were familiar with the discussion at the meeting.
By contrast, the Europeans, including Britain, France and Germany, envision a much less robust international buffer force, one that would follow a cease-fire and operate with the consent of the Lebanese government in southern Lebanon.
Such a situation would mean that Hezbollah, which is part of the Lebanese government, would be part of a decision that led to its own disarming and the protection of Israel, which the Europeans see as far-fetched.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who began a trip to the region on Monday with a quick first stop in Beirut, will hold an international meeting on the crisis in Rome on Wednesday, when a multinational force will be a prime topic. But she has already ruled out the participation of American troops.
On Monday, Germany’s defense minister, Franz Josef Jung, said Berlin would be willing to participate if both Israel and Hezbollah requested German participation and if certain tough conditions were met. These include a cease-fire and the release of the captured Israeli soldiers.
In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair said he hoped a plan, including an international force, a mutual cease-fire and the release of the captured soldiers, could be negotiated and announced in the next few days.
“If someone’s got a better plan, I’d like to hear it,” he said.
But Britain has also made clear in private diplomatic exchanges that with thousands of its troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans, it could not be counted on to send troops into still another theater.
As for France, which already has troops in Lebanon as part of the United Nations peacekeeping force known as Unifil, Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy left his meetings with Israeli leaders on Sunday convinced that the idea of a new international force for Lebanon was “premature,” French officials said.
The European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said Monday in Brussels that an international force would not be “an easy force to deploy,” but added that talks were under way about such a force under a United Nations Security Council mandate.
“I think several member states of the European Union will be ready to provide all necessary assistance,” he said, but did not name the countries.
Mr. Solana is said to be wary of a NATO-led force, another senior European Union official said. “NATO is too identified with the United States,” the official said. “It would be Iraq all over again.”
At NATO headquarters, officials said they were taken by surprise by comments of Israeli officials that they would welcome a NATO-led force to secure their border.
“No request has been made to NATO,” said James Appathurai, a NATO spokesman. “The possibility, the shape, the structure of any international force — none of them has been seriously addressed.”
In an ambitious new mission, NATO is scheduled to take over military operations from the American-led coalition in Afghanistan at the end of the month.
The challenge of creating a viable international force to secure Israel’s border with Lebanon was captured by Nahum Barnea, a columnist for the Israeli daily newspaper Yediot Aharonot. The European foreign ministers were enthusiastic, he said.
“They only had one small condition — for the force to be made up of soldiers from another country,” Mr. Barnea wrote. “The Germans recommended France; the French recommended Egypt, and so on. It is doubtful whether there is a single country in the West currently volunteering to lay down its soldiers on Hezbollah’s fence.”
Elaine Sciolino reported from Paris for this article, and Steven Erlanger from Jerusalem. Alan Cowell contributed reporting from London.
By ELAINE SCIOLINO and STEVEN ERLANGER
Published: July 25, 2006
PARIS, July 24 — Support is building quickly for an international military force to be placed in southern Lebanon, but there remains a small problem: where will the troops come from?
Skip to next paragraph
The United States has ruled out its soldiers’ participating, NATO says it is overstretched, Britain feels its troops are overcommitted and Germany says it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia that it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development.
“All the politicians are saying, ‘Great, great’ to the idea of a force, but no one is saying whose soldiers will be on the ground,” said one senior European official. “Everyone will volunteer to be in charge of the logistics in Cyprus.”
There has been strong verbal support for such a force in public, but also private concerns that soldiers would be seen as allied to Israel and would have to fight Hezbollah guerrillas who do not want foreigners, let alone the Lebanese Army, coming between them and the Israelis.
There is also the burden of history. France — which has called the idea of a force premature — and the United States are haunted by their last participation in a multinational force in Lebanon, after the Israeli invasion in 1982, when they became belligerents in the Lebanese civil war and tangled fatally with Hezbollah.
They withdrew in defeat after Hezbollah’s suicide bombing of a Marine barracks in Beirut in October 1983, which killed 241 American service members and 58 French paratroopers.
Israel’s own public position toward an international force has been welcoming, but skeptical, insisting that it be capable of military missions, not just peacekeeping.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert suggested that the force could be made up of soldiers from both European and Arab states, while his defense minister, Amir Peretz, spoke of soldiers from NATO countries.
But Israel senses no great willingness among leading European countries to take part, and Israeli officials emphasize that they will not accept an end to hostilities until clear policy goals are met.
For the moment, at least, Israel is laying out an ambitious, if perhaps unrealistic, view of what the force would do. Israel wants it to keep Hezbollah away from the border, allow the Lebanese government and army to take control over all of its territory, and monitor Lebanon’s borders to ensure that Hezbollah is not resupplied with weapons.
Israel’s foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, laid out the goals in a meeting on Sunday with senior officials of the British, German and French governments. Ms. Livni told them that Israel’s goal was to disarm Hezbollah and that either the Israeli Army or an international force would have to do it, said officials from those four countries who were familiar with the discussion at the meeting.
By contrast, the Europeans, including Britain, France and Germany, envision a much less robust international buffer force, one that would follow a cease-fire and operate with the consent of the Lebanese government in southern Lebanon.
Such a situation would mean that Hezbollah, which is part of the Lebanese government, would be part of a decision that led to its own disarming and the protection of Israel, which the Europeans see as far-fetched.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who began a trip to the region on Monday with a quick first stop in Beirut, will hold an international meeting on the crisis in Rome on Wednesday, when a multinational force will be a prime topic. But she has already ruled out the participation of American troops.
On Monday, Germany’s defense minister, Franz Josef Jung, said Berlin would be willing to participate if both Israel and Hezbollah requested German participation and if certain tough conditions were met. These include a cease-fire and the release of the captured Israeli soldiers.
In London, Prime Minister Tony Blair said he hoped a plan, including an international force, a mutual cease-fire and the release of the captured soldiers, could be negotiated and announced in the next few days.
“If someone’s got a better plan, I’d like to hear it,” he said.
But Britain has also made clear in private diplomatic exchanges that with thousands of its troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Balkans, it could not be counted on to send troops into still another theater.
As for France, which already has troops in Lebanon as part of the United Nations peacekeeping force known as Unifil, Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy left his meetings with Israeli leaders on Sunday convinced that the idea of a new international force for Lebanon was “premature,” French officials said.
The European Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said Monday in Brussels that an international force would not be “an easy force to deploy,” but added that talks were under way about such a force under a United Nations Security Council mandate.
“I think several member states of the European Union will be ready to provide all necessary assistance,” he said, but did not name the countries.
Mr. Solana is said to be wary of a NATO-led force, another senior European Union official said. “NATO is too identified with the United States,” the official said. “It would be Iraq all over again.”
At NATO headquarters, officials said they were taken by surprise by comments of Israeli officials that they would welcome a NATO-led force to secure their border.
“No request has been made to NATO,” said James Appathurai, a NATO spokesman. “The possibility, the shape, the structure of any international force — none of them has been seriously addressed.”
In an ambitious new mission, NATO is scheduled to take over military operations from the American-led coalition in Afghanistan at the end of the month.
The challenge of creating a viable international force to secure Israel’s border with Lebanon was captured by Nahum Barnea, a columnist for the Israeli daily newspaper Yediot Aharonot. The European foreign ministers were enthusiastic, he said.
“They only had one small condition — for the force to be made up of soldiers from another country,” Mr. Barnea wrote. “The Germans recommended France; the French recommended Egypt, and so on. It is doubtful whether there is a single country in the West currently volunteering to lay down its soldiers on Hezbollah’s fence.”
Elaine Sciolino reported from Paris for this article, and Steven Erlanger from Jerusalem. Alan Cowell contributed reporting from London.
The war-cliches dictionary, part two- from Shmuel Rosner
The dictionary of war clichés - part 2 (Ha_Aretz)
To the many readers who sent suggestions, thank you. To those of you who missed part 1 - read it here.
And now to the second part:
We have hit a large part of their weapons arsenal (IDF):
And in two weeks they'll get more by way of Iran or Syria. The same goes for "we hit the top commanders of...", "we hit 80 percent of the terrorists infrastructure" etc.
We condemn both sides...:
Conan O'Brien had a good one perfectly suitable for this. "This morning the Vatican weighed in on the crisis. The Vatican came out and condemned Israel's attacks on Lebanon... which is great, because all day yesterday, the Jews and Muslims were asking, 'What do the Catholics think?'"
United Nations delegation:
Are you Americans? You're not Americans? Then why would you even think Israel is going to listen to you? (The same goes to EU envoys, Russian messengers, and all other goodwill ambassadors).
Special envoy Vijay Nambiar:
The operation will continue for as long as it takes us to learn how to pronounce your name right.
At some point in the future, the secretary intends to travel to the region (U.S State department):
At some point in the future Secretary Rice also intends to have a hair cut, to ride a horse and to retire after a long, fulfilling career. But seriously, the date they're talking about is not far off, and maybe as soon as next Sunday.
The situation is very serious, very grave (EU's Solana):
The EU was impotent so far, and intends to stay so - but will always be ready to give a grave assessment of "the situation." How about sending an international force?
We have exercised pressure on the Syrian government (Italian foreign minister):
The truth is, the world hasn't yet put real pressure on Syria. Just consider this: The UN started a process of investigating the parties responsible for the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. This should have led to more Security Council resolutions and more sanctions on Syria - but it never happened. At such a pace, the resolution might be ready by the time Assad's grandson comes to power.
International force:
A military unit capable of escaping as fast as everyone else.
The Lebanese army is strong enough (Israel):
To do nothing. The chances it will fight Hezbollah, so I'm told by Lebanese in the know, is zero. The military is mostly Shi'ite and is taking orders from the president, a Syrian puppet. On the other hand, Israel doesn't trust an international force, and for good reasons.
No more. Israel will not be held hostage - not by terror gangs or by a terrorist authority or by any sovereign state (Ehud Olmert):
Well, not until next week.
Everyone wants it to stop now (Tony Blair):
It's like saying "everyone wants peace," or "everyone wants to be rich". Of course everyone wants it to stop - on their terms!
Disproportionate / Disproportionate response:
This expression is the clear winner of the day, with many readers suggesting it should be included in our dictionary. Michael Weingarten wrote: "How about adding 'disproportionate'? What does it mean? If they kill 10 of our guys, we should only kill 10 of theirs, or it's not proportional?"Bruce Feldman of West Lafayette, Indiana, suggested: "A dangerous condition threatening an actual solution to a problem. Targets of disproportionate response are entitled to the status of "victims."
Steven Poole directed me to his blog where you can find this: "Few will suggest that a pedantic notion of the exactly proportionate response, i.e. to kidnap two members of Hezbollah in return, was the correct deed." Anyway, an interesting, more serious, article entitled "Israel and the Doctrine of Proportionality" can be read ). I want to thank the readers Paul Denhup, Nicole Miznik, David Mark, Jacob Penn, Muhammad Bashir.
To the many readers who sent suggestions, thank you. To those of you who missed part 1 - read it here.
And now to the second part:
We have hit a large part of their weapons arsenal (IDF):
And in two weeks they'll get more by way of Iran or Syria. The same goes for "we hit the top commanders of...", "we hit 80 percent of the terrorists infrastructure" etc.
We condemn both sides...:
Conan O'Brien had a good one perfectly suitable for this. "This morning the Vatican weighed in on the crisis. The Vatican came out and condemned Israel's attacks on Lebanon... which is great, because all day yesterday, the Jews and Muslims were asking, 'What do the Catholics think?'"
United Nations delegation:
Are you Americans? You're not Americans? Then why would you even think Israel is going to listen to you? (The same goes to EU envoys, Russian messengers, and all other goodwill ambassadors).
Special envoy Vijay Nambiar:
The operation will continue for as long as it takes us to learn how to pronounce your name right.
At some point in the future, the secretary intends to travel to the region (U.S State department):
At some point in the future Secretary Rice also intends to have a hair cut, to ride a horse and to retire after a long, fulfilling career. But seriously, the date they're talking about is not far off, and maybe as soon as next Sunday.
The situation is very serious, very grave (EU's Solana):
The EU was impotent so far, and intends to stay so - but will always be ready to give a grave assessment of "the situation." How about sending an international force?
We have exercised pressure on the Syrian government (Italian foreign minister):
The truth is, the world hasn't yet put real pressure on Syria. Just consider this: The UN started a process of investigating the parties responsible for the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. This should have led to more Security Council resolutions and more sanctions on Syria - but it never happened. At such a pace, the resolution might be ready by the time Assad's grandson comes to power.
International force:
A military unit capable of escaping as fast as everyone else.
The Lebanese army is strong enough (Israel):
To do nothing. The chances it will fight Hezbollah, so I'm told by Lebanese in the know, is zero. The military is mostly Shi'ite and is taking orders from the president, a Syrian puppet. On the other hand, Israel doesn't trust an international force, and for good reasons.
No more. Israel will not be held hostage - not by terror gangs or by a terrorist authority or by any sovereign state (Ehud Olmert):
Well, not until next week.
Everyone wants it to stop now (Tony Blair):
It's like saying "everyone wants peace," or "everyone wants to be rich". Of course everyone wants it to stop - on their terms!
Disproportionate / Disproportionate response:
This expression is the clear winner of the day, with many readers suggesting it should be included in our dictionary. Michael Weingarten wrote: "How about adding 'disproportionate'? What does it mean? If they kill 10 of our guys, we should only kill 10 of theirs, or it's not proportional?"Bruce Feldman of West Lafayette, Indiana, suggested: "A dangerous condition threatening an actual solution to a problem. Targets of disproportionate response are entitled to the status of "victims."
Steven Poole directed me to his blog where you can find this: "Few will suggest that a pedantic notion of the exactly proportionate response, i.e. to kidnap two members of Hezbollah in return, was the correct deed." Anyway, an interesting, more serious, article entitled "Israel and the Doctrine of Proportionality" can be read ). I want to thank the readers Paul Denhup, Nicole Miznik, David Mark, Jacob Penn, Muhammad Bashir.
Deeper in Lebanon- from AP
By KATHY GANNON, Associated Press Writer 31 minutes ago
SIDON, Lebanon - Israeli ground forces pushed deeper into Lebanon on Monday in fierce fighting and captured two Hezbollah guerrillas, while two aid convoys carrying food, generators and other badly needed supplies left Beirut for two southern cities.
Four Israeli soldiers were killed — two in fighting and two in a helicopter crash — and 20 were wounded, military officials said.
Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice made a surprise visit to Beirut to launch diplomatic efforts aimed at ending 13 days of warfare. Prime Minister Fuad Saniora told her his government is hoping to "put an end to the war being inflicted on Lebanon." He told Rice that
Israel' bombardment was taking his country "backward 50 years."
An official close to parliament speaker Nabih Berri, a close Hezbollah ally, said his talks with Rice failed to "reach an agreement because Rice insisted on one full package to end the fighting." The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks were private. David Welch, an assistant secretary of state traveling with Rice, said later it was "unfair" to say Rice's meeting with Berri went poorly.
Israel has not bombed Beirut since Sunday afternoon and appeared to have stopped all airstrikes on the city in deference to Rice's visit. Rice later flew to Jerusalem.
Saniora has pleaded with Washington to press Israel to call a total cease-fire in bombardment that has demolished Lebanon's infrastructure and killed hundreds.
President Bush' has opposed an immediate cease-fire, saying the root cause of the conflict must be resolved.
Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in remarks published Monday the priority is for a cease-fire and he was open to discussing ideas on ending the crisis.
Secretary-General
Kofi Annan' said he wants a meeting Wednesday in Rome on the Mideast violence to agree on a package including a cease-fire, deployment of an international force and the release of two Israeli soldiers abducted by Hezbollah.
Fierce fighting raged at the border as Israeli troops moved deeper into Lebanon to besiege the biggest town close to the frontier — Bint Jbail, nicknamed the "capital of the resistance" due to its intense support of Hezbollah during Israel's 1982-2000 occupation of the south. Two Israeli soldiers were killed and 20 were wounded, the military said.
Bint Jbail holds strong symbolism for Hezbollah. Signs in the city tout its nickname, earned for its vehement backing of the guerrillas even while Israeli troops held the south. A day after Israel ended its occupation in 2000, Nasrallah went straight to Jbail for his first celebration rally.
Much of the town's population of 30,000 is believed to have fled, but many remain. A Red Cross doctor who visited Sunday, Dr. Hassan Nasreddine, said he saw families crowded into schools, mosques and other shelters.
Following an intense artillery barrage, Israeli troops took control of a hilltop in Bint Jbail, but the rest of the town was held by Hezbollah guerrillas, military officials said.
An Israeli helicopter crashed in northern Israel after hitting an electrical wire while making an emergency landing, killing both pilots.
Hezbollah said it caused Israeli casualties in hits on five tanks on the road to Bint Jbail and around Maroun al-Ras, a hilltop village closer to the border that Israeli ground forces seized in heavy weekend fighting.
Israel said its troops captured two Hezbollah guerrillas, the first it had taken in the Lebanon fighting. Brig. Gen. Alon Friedman said they are being held in Israel "with the aim of interrogating them."
Hezbollah continued its missile attacks on northern Israel, firing more than 80 rockets and slightly wounding 13. Militants fired 95 rockets on Sunday and 129 on Saturday, the Israeli military said. U.N. observers in south Lebanon said the Israeli numbers appear accurate.
Sunday was one of the heaviest days of Israeli bombardment, with 270 targets, compared with 120 the day before, according to the military.
At least 384 people have been killed in Lebanon, including 20 soldiers and 11 Hezbollah fighters, according to security officials. At least 600,000 Lebanese have fled their homes, according to the WHO — with an estimate by Lebanon's finance minister putting the number at 750,000, nearly 20 percent of the population.
Israel's death toll stands at 39, with 17 people killed by Hezbollah rockets and 22 soldiers killed in the fighting.
Up to 40 percent of the 200,000 Lebanese who live in villages along territory closest to the border are likely still in their homes, unable or too afraid to move because of Israeli shelling, U.N. observers said.
More foreigners fled Lebanon by sea from Beirut. A Greek ferry commissioned by European countries arrived in Tyre and took on hundreds of stranded foreigners.
A group of 300 Americans and 100 other Europeans were believed trapped in villages south of Tyre, said Erik Rattat, a German official involved in the operation. It did not appear that they made it to the ship. An Associated Press reporter at the scene an hour before it left said they had not arrived, and the U.S. Embassy could not immediately say if they had reached the ship in time.
Some 11,700 Americans have fled Lebanon, the State Department said. U.S. Consul William Gill said most Americans who wanted to leave had done so by Sunday.
President Bush ordered a fleet of U.S. helicopters and ships to carry badly needed humanitarian supplies into Lebanon.
"I am deeply concerned about the Lebanese people and what they are enduring," Rice said before meeting Berri. "I am obviously concerned about the humanitarian situation."
Officials have been trying to move aid along shattered roads to the south where it's needed most — although Israel has not defined a safe route to the region.
Two convoys carrying generators for hospitals, food, tarpaulins and hygiene kits were heading from Beirut to Tyre and the southern city of Marjayoun, said Hisham Hassan, ICRC spokesman in Lebanon.
Aid was starting to move into Beirut's port after Israel opened it for humanitarian ships. An Italian warship brought food, medicine, tents, blankets, water, electrical generators and ambulances. A ferry carrying supplies from France also arrived.
U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland appealed for $150 million in humanitarian aid for the next three months for food, health care, water and sanitation. He said 500,000-800,000 people have been affected by the fighting.
Egeland said he was asking the Israelis for safe passage for aid ships to enter the northern port of Tripoli and the southern port of Tyre. So far, Israel has loosened its sea blockade only for Beirut.
Rice's unannounced visit aimed to show support for the embattled, Western-backed government and to tackle what the United States and Israel believe to be the key to bringing peace: ending Hezbollah's domination along the Israeli border.
Her mission is the first U.S. effort on the ground to try to resolve the crisis that began July 12 with Israel's onslaught on Lebanon sparked by Hezbollah's capture of the two Israeli soldiers. Rice flew by helicopter from Cyprus to Beirut, then traveled under heavy guard in a motorcade to Saniora's office.
She praised Saniora's "courage and steadfastness." After meeting for more than an hour, they left without speaking to reporters.
She was in the city for about five hours and then returned to Cyprus.
The White House has said an international force may be needed to help the Lebanese army move into the south, which the Beirut government has long refused, wary of confronting the guerrillas' power there and of tearing apart the country.
Arab heavyweights Egypt and Saudi Arabia were pushing
Syria to end its support for the guerrillas, Arab diplomats in Cairo said. Israel signaled a policy shift, saying it would accept an international force — preferably from
NATO — to ensure the peace in southern Lebanon.
British Prime Minister
Tony Blair said he hoped to give details of a cease-fire plan in the next few days.
In Tehran, a Hezbollah representative in
Iran warned that his militant group plans to widen its attacks on Israelis until "there will be no place they are safe." Hossein Safiadeen said there would be "a new Middle East in the way of Hezbollah and Islam, not in the way of Rice and Israel."
En route, Rice discussed possibly working with Syria on a solution. The Bush administration has blamed Syria — and Iran — for stoking the violence by encouraging Hezbollah to attack northern Israel.
"The problem isn't that people haven't talked to the Syrians. It's that the Syrians haven't acted," she said. "It's not as if we don't have diplomatic relations. We do."
Rice has tried to walk delicately between supporting the Lebanese government while also not dictating to its ally Israel how it should handle its own security. Her posture has frustrated numerous allies.
"We all want to urgently end the fighting. We have absolutely the same goal," Rice said.
___
Associated Press reporters Katherine Shrader traveling with Rice, Benjamin Harvey on the Israel-Lebanon border, Jill Lawless in London, Brian Murphy in Tehran, Iran, and Joseph Panossian and Lauren Frayer in Beirut contributed to this report
SIDON, Lebanon - Israeli ground forces pushed deeper into Lebanon on Monday in fierce fighting and captured two Hezbollah guerrillas, while two aid convoys carrying food, generators and other badly needed supplies left Beirut for two southern cities.
Four Israeli soldiers were killed — two in fighting and two in a helicopter crash — and 20 were wounded, military officials said.
Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice made a surprise visit to Beirut to launch diplomatic efforts aimed at ending 13 days of warfare. Prime Minister Fuad Saniora told her his government is hoping to "put an end to the war being inflicted on Lebanon." He told Rice that
Israel' bombardment was taking his country "backward 50 years."
An official close to parliament speaker Nabih Berri, a close Hezbollah ally, said his talks with Rice failed to "reach an agreement because Rice insisted on one full package to end the fighting." The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the talks were private. David Welch, an assistant secretary of state traveling with Rice, said later it was "unfair" to say Rice's meeting with Berri went poorly.
Israel has not bombed Beirut since Sunday afternoon and appeared to have stopped all airstrikes on the city in deference to Rice's visit. Rice later flew to Jerusalem.
Saniora has pleaded with Washington to press Israel to call a total cease-fire in bombardment that has demolished Lebanon's infrastructure and killed hundreds.
President Bush' has opposed an immediate cease-fire, saying the root cause of the conflict must be resolved.
Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in remarks published Monday the priority is for a cease-fire and he was open to discussing ideas on ending the crisis.
Secretary-General
Kofi Annan' said he wants a meeting Wednesday in Rome on the Mideast violence to agree on a package including a cease-fire, deployment of an international force and the release of two Israeli soldiers abducted by Hezbollah.
Fierce fighting raged at the border as Israeli troops moved deeper into Lebanon to besiege the biggest town close to the frontier — Bint Jbail, nicknamed the "capital of the resistance" due to its intense support of Hezbollah during Israel's 1982-2000 occupation of the south. Two Israeli soldiers were killed and 20 were wounded, the military said.
Bint Jbail holds strong symbolism for Hezbollah. Signs in the city tout its nickname, earned for its vehement backing of the guerrillas even while Israeli troops held the south. A day after Israel ended its occupation in 2000, Nasrallah went straight to Jbail for his first celebration rally.
Much of the town's population of 30,000 is believed to have fled, but many remain. A Red Cross doctor who visited Sunday, Dr. Hassan Nasreddine, said he saw families crowded into schools, mosques and other shelters.
Following an intense artillery barrage, Israeli troops took control of a hilltop in Bint Jbail, but the rest of the town was held by Hezbollah guerrillas, military officials said.
An Israeli helicopter crashed in northern Israel after hitting an electrical wire while making an emergency landing, killing both pilots.
Hezbollah said it caused Israeli casualties in hits on five tanks on the road to Bint Jbail and around Maroun al-Ras, a hilltop village closer to the border that Israeli ground forces seized in heavy weekend fighting.
Israel said its troops captured two Hezbollah guerrillas, the first it had taken in the Lebanon fighting. Brig. Gen. Alon Friedman said they are being held in Israel "with the aim of interrogating them."
Hezbollah continued its missile attacks on northern Israel, firing more than 80 rockets and slightly wounding 13. Militants fired 95 rockets on Sunday and 129 on Saturday, the Israeli military said. U.N. observers in south Lebanon said the Israeli numbers appear accurate.
Sunday was one of the heaviest days of Israeli bombardment, with 270 targets, compared with 120 the day before, according to the military.
At least 384 people have been killed in Lebanon, including 20 soldiers and 11 Hezbollah fighters, according to security officials. At least 600,000 Lebanese have fled their homes, according to the WHO — with an estimate by Lebanon's finance minister putting the number at 750,000, nearly 20 percent of the population.
Israel's death toll stands at 39, with 17 people killed by Hezbollah rockets and 22 soldiers killed in the fighting.
Up to 40 percent of the 200,000 Lebanese who live in villages along territory closest to the border are likely still in their homes, unable or too afraid to move because of Israeli shelling, U.N. observers said.
More foreigners fled Lebanon by sea from Beirut. A Greek ferry commissioned by European countries arrived in Tyre and took on hundreds of stranded foreigners.
A group of 300 Americans and 100 other Europeans were believed trapped in villages south of Tyre, said Erik Rattat, a German official involved in the operation. It did not appear that they made it to the ship. An Associated Press reporter at the scene an hour before it left said they had not arrived, and the U.S. Embassy could not immediately say if they had reached the ship in time.
Some 11,700 Americans have fled Lebanon, the State Department said. U.S. Consul William Gill said most Americans who wanted to leave had done so by Sunday.
President Bush ordered a fleet of U.S. helicopters and ships to carry badly needed humanitarian supplies into Lebanon.
"I am deeply concerned about the Lebanese people and what they are enduring," Rice said before meeting Berri. "I am obviously concerned about the humanitarian situation."
Officials have been trying to move aid along shattered roads to the south where it's needed most — although Israel has not defined a safe route to the region.
Two convoys carrying generators for hospitals, food, tarpaulins and hygiene kits were heading from Beirut to Tyre and the southern city of Marjayoun, said Hisham Hassan, ICRC spokesman in Lebanon.
Aid was starting to move into Beirut's port after Israel opened it for humanitarian ships. An Italian warship brought food, medicine, tents, blankets, water, electrical generators and ambulances. A ferry carrying supplies from France also arrived.
U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland appealed for $150 million in humanitarian aid for the next three months for food, health care, water and sanitation. He said 500,000-800,000 people have been affected by the fighting.
Egeland said he was asking the Israelis for safe passage for aid ships to enter the northern port of Tripoli and the southern port of Tyre. So far, Israel has loosened its sea blockade only for Beirut.
Rice's unannounced visit aimed to show support for the embattled, Western-backed government and to tackle what the United States and Israel believe to be the key to bringing peace: ending Hezbollah's domination along the Israeli border.
Her mission is the first U.S. effort on the ground to try to resolve the crisis that began July 12 with Israel's onslaught on Lebanon sparked by Hezbollah's capture of the two Israeli soldiers. Rice flew by helicopter from Cyprus to Beirut, then traveled under heavy guard in a motorcade to Saniora's office.
She praised Saniora's "courage and steadfastness." After meeting for more than an hour, they left without speaking to reporters.
She was in the city for about five hours and then returned to Cyprus.
The White House has said an international force may be needed to help the Lebanese army move into the south, which the Beirut government has long refused, wary of confronting the guerrillas' power there and of tearing apart the country.
Arab heavyweights Egypt and Saudi Arabia were pushing
Syria to end its support for the guerrillas, Arab diplomats in Cairo said. Israel signaled a policy shift, saying it would accept an international force — preferably from
NATO — to ensure the peace in southern Lebanon.
British Prime Minister
Tony Blair said he hoped to give details of a cease-fire plan in the next few days.
In Tehran, a Hezbollah representative in
Iran warned that his militant group plans to widen its attacks on Israelis until "there will be no place they are safe." Hossein Safiadeen said there would be "a new Middle East in the way of Hezbollah and Islam, not in the way of Rice and Israel."
En route, Rice discussed possibly working with Syria on a solution. The Bush administration has blamed Syria — and Iran — for stoking the violence by encouraging Hezbollah to attack northern Israel.
"The problem isn't that people haven't talked to the Syrians. It's that the Syrians haven't acted," she said. "It's not as if we don't have diplomatic relations. We do."
Rice has tried to walk delicately between supporting the Lebanese government while also not dictating to its ally Israel how it should handle its own security. Her posture has frustrated numerous allies.
"We all want to urgently end the fighting. We have absolutely the same goal," Rice said.
___
Associated Press reporters Katherine Shrader traveling with Rice, Benjamin Harvey on the Israel-Lebanon border, Jill Lawless in London, Brian Murphy in Tehran, Iran, and Joseph Panossian and Lauren Frayer in Beirut contributed to this report
Monday, July 24, 2006
Alexandru Bittner -"rechinul deltei"
Exista pe undeva un soi de coincidenta de nume "Bender" si Bittner.
Marele Maestru al Combinatiilor, Ostap Bender, omul care cunostea 400 de metode aproape cinstite de a face un ban ar fi fost mandru de Bittner Alexandru. In randurile de mai jos , aflam, gratie Evenimentului Zilei, cum s-a putut face un ban (aproape cinstit?) cu Delta Dunarii.
Am descoperit barfa respectiva pe net. O dau si eu mai departe, asa cum am gasit-o.
Alexandru Bittner,
rechinul Deltei
Evenimentul zilei" continua seria dezvaluirilor despre criza sociala si economica din Delta Dunarii, cea mai valoroasa rezervatie ecologica din Europa, transformata de guvernul Adrian Nastase in fieful clientelei PSD.
Astazi va prezentam primul pas catre transformarea Deltei intr-un baronat al fidelilor PSD, pas facut prin semnarea unui aparent banal contract de asociere intre o societate de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca, si o firma privata, Pharmamed Sanitas SRL. Manevra comerciala a permis vanzarea activelor imobiliare ale firmei de stat cu o suma de cinci ori mai mica decat valoarea reala. Astfel, terenurile si cladirile din Jurilovca au fost cumparate cu numai 267.000 de dolari, fata de 1,5 milioane de dolari cat valorau, conform unor estimari oficiale. Pharmamed Sanitas SRL, transformata intre timp in Piscicola Tour SRL, si-a modificat actionariatul, in ecuatie aparand prietenul de-o viata al lui Adrian Nastase, Alexandru Bittner.Acesta a cumparat Piscicola Tour intr-un moment foarte potrivit, cu putin timp inaintea emiterii hotararii de guvern, semnata de Adrian Nastase in 2002, prin care s-a decis concesionarea Deltei Dunarii.
Gaselnita concesionarilor, inventata acum trei ani de fostul guvern PSD, a permis crearea unui monopol piscicol in paradisul de la gurile Dunarii. Acesta a fost concentrat in mainile unui grup restrans de afaceristi, dintre care cel mai influent este Alexandru Bittner, prietenul fostului prim-ministru Adrian Nastase.
Preludiul unui tun de proportii
Piscicola Tour SRL a concesionat in 2002 cinci zone importante din Delta si o amenajare piscicola de la Consiliul Judetean Tulcea. Multi dintre pescarii care se spetesc muncind pentru concesionari rostesc numele lui Alexandru Bittner, omul din spatele Piscicola Tour SRL, cu un soi de teama amestecata cu obida.Motivul este simplu: absolut toti pescarii autorizati care locuiesc in zonele stapanite acum de prietenul fostului prim-ministru sunt obligati sa lucreze pentru Piscicola Tour, in conditiile financiare impuse de firma. Contractul de concesiune detinut de firma reprezentata de Bittner ii da exclusiv acesteia dreptul de a pescui in apele Dunarii. Oamenii isi explica cu greu rapiditatea cu care Piscicola Tour si-a intins tentaculele peste jumatate din rezervatie. Ca atare, prietenia recunoscuta dintre Bittner si Adrian Nastase a devenit folclor printre satenii din Delta Dunarii .
"Lipitoarea"
Insa, paradoxal, bazele actualului imperiu Piscicola Tour s-au pus in luna februarie a anului 2000, cand partidul lui Adrian Nastase nu ajunsese inca la putere. Fosta societate de stat Piscicola Jurilovca SA a incheiat pe 23 februarie 2000 un contract de "asociere in participatiune" cu firma privata Pharmamed Sanitas SRL Bucuresti, condusa de Vladimir Dragos Popa, fiul unui fost ambasador roman in Iugoslavia.Contractul presupunea ca ambele firme sa desfasoare in comun activitati de pescuit, sa exploateze stuful, sa comercializeze produsele obtinute sau sa faca turism. Si activele fostei societati de stat Piscicola Jurilovca au inceput sa fie exploatate in comun: o cladire de birouri, 4,2 hectare de teren, in care intra si 1,5 hectare de la Gura Portitei, pe care s-a ridicat statiunea "Eden", cherhanale, magazii si peste 20 de barci pescaresti. Totodata, lucrul efectiv era prestat de muncitorii fostei firme de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca.In schimb, societatea privata Pharmamed Sanitas SRL s-a obligat la investitii esalonate, in suma de zece miliarde de lei. Acesta a fost preludiul marelui tun.
A doua etapa
Prin incheierea contractului de "asociere in participatiune", partenerii privati au pregatit terenul pentru scopul lor principal: acapararea societatii de stat. Prezentul contract poate fi transformat, cu acordul partilor, in contract de leasing imobiliar, cu clauza ferma de cumparare". Asa suna o clauza strecurata viclean la sfarsitul contractului de asociere. Dupa doar zece luni s-a trecut la a doua etapa: contractul de leasing imobiliar.In acest nou contract, Piscicola Jurilovca SA se obliga sa transmita dreptul de folosinta, pana la achitarea ultimei rate, asupra tuturor activelor sale, catre aceeasi Pharmamed Sanitas. Cu acordul defunctului Fond al Proprietatii de Stat (FPS) a fost stabilit si pretul pentru toate bunurile statului la numai 8,4 miliarde de lei, adica aproximativ 276.000 de dolari. In realitate, numai activele imobiliare valorau 1,5 milioane de dolari, suma fiind estimata la vremea respectiva de un evaluator din Administratia Rezervatiei Biosferei "Delta Dunarii" (ARBDD).In actionariatul firmei Pharmamed Sanitas mai figurau, in afara de Vladimir Dragos Popa, si Marian Matache, asociat cu Bittner si sef al sucursalei constantene a companiei "Astra Asigurari", precum si Bartolomeu Finis, un alt partener de afaceri al lui Bittner, implicat in doua privatizari dubioase ale patrimoniului fostului BTT.
Devalizarea
Deveniti stapani pe bunurile Piscicola Jurilovca SA, patronii firmei Pharmamed Sanitas SRL au infiintat la Gura Portitei o noua firma, Piscicola Tour SRL, controlata de acelasi grup de afaceristi. In decembrie 2001, firma nou infiintata Piscicola Tour a cumparat pur si simplu patrimoniul societatii Piscicola Jurilovca, cu exceptia celor 4,2 hectare de teren, achitand 8,4 miliarde de lei.Adica aceeasi suma mentionata si in contractul reziliat de leasing imobiliar, semnat anterior cu aceiasi oameni. Pe acest ultim contract de vanzare-cumparare, din partea fostei societati de stat si-a pus semnatura directorul general de atunci, Spirache Pascut, numit de APAPS-ul lui Ovidiu Musetescu la conducerea Piscicola Jurilovca. Pascut este un membru notoriu al filialei PSD Prahova.
Bittner intra oficial in schema
In anul 2002 a venit randul lui Bittner sa intre in scena. Astfel, societatea off-shore, Heavy Industry LTD, infiintata la Londra, a cumparat 65,19% din noua Piscicola Tour, de la Bartolomeu Finis, Marian Matache si Vladimir Dragos Popa. Intr-o recenta emisiune TV, Bittner a recunoscut ca este reprezentantul Heavy Industry LTD, aspect, oricum, de notorietate, in Delta. Dupa achizitie, directorul Piscicola Tour a devenit Doru Franculet, omul sau de incredere. Interesant este ca toti cei care au pregatit initial afacerea Piscicola Tour au legaturi de afaceri cu Alexandru Bittner. Bartolomeu Finis este cel mai graitor exemplu. Acesta, alaturi de interpusii lui Bittner, a pus mana pe sapte hectare de teren in Parcul Herastrau din Bucuresti, prin aceeasi formula, a contractului de asociere in participatiune.
Ingineria imobiliara
Epilogul Piscicola Jurilovca SA s-a consumat in septembrie 2003, cand APAPS a scos firma la privatizare. Oficial, cel care a cumparat-o este Doru Franculet, omul lui Alexandru Bittner.Acesta a achitat pe loc 766,4 milioane lei pentru 99,97% din actiunile firmei, in dolari valoarea fiind de 22.700, adica pretul la acea vreme al unui apartament de doua camere in Bucuresti, intr-o zona nu tocmai grozava. Tranzactia finala s-a incheiat intr-o graba nejustificata.In aceeasi perioada a avut loc si ingineria imobiliara prin care cele 4,2 hectare de teren concesionate de Piscicola Jurilovca de la ARBDD au fost scoase din domeniul public si transferate in administratia Agentiei Domeniilor Statului (ADS). Din suprafata totala a terenului, 1,5 hectare sunt ocupate de statiunea " Eden", inaugurata cu mare pompa de Bittner la Gura Portitei. Piscicola, trambulina pentru ocuparea Deltei Oamenii lui Bittner au castigat licitatia de concesiune a 4,2 hectare din Delta folosindu-se de patrimoniul preluat de la fosta societate de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca. Caietul de sarcini al acesteia ii obliga pe concesionarii Deltei sa fie dotati cu echipamente de pescuit. Astfel, terenul, barcile, magaziile, uneltele si cherhanalele statului au umflat portofoliul Piscicola Tour.
Mihai Munteanu, 27 sep 2005 (Evenimentul Zilei)
Marele Maestru al Combinatiilor, Ostap Bender, omul care cunostea 400 de metode aproape cinstite de a face un ban ar fi fost mandru de Bittner Alexandru. In randurile de mai jos , aflam, gratie Evenimentului Zilei, cum s-a putut face un ban (aproape cinstit?) cu Delta Dunarii.
Am descoperit barfa respectiva pe net. O dau si eu mai departe, asa cum am gasit-o.
Alexandru Bittner,
rechinul Deltei
Evenimentul zilei" continua seria dezvaluirilor despre criza sociala si economica din Delta Dunarii, cea mai valoroasa rezervatie ecologica din Europa, transformata de guvernul Adrian Nastase in fieful clientelei PSD.
Astazi va prezentam primul pas catre transformarea Deltei intr-un baronat al fidelilor PSD, pas facut prin semnarea unui aparent banal contract de asociere intre o societate de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca, si o firma privata, Pharmamed Sanitas SRL. Manevra comerciala a permis vanzarea activelor imobiliare ale firmei de stat cu o suma de cinci ori mai mica decat valoarea reala. Astfel, terenurile si cladirile din Jurilovca au fost cumparate cu numai 267.000 de dolari, fata de 1,5 milioane de dolari cat valorau, conform unor estimari oficiale. Pharmamed Sanitas SRL, transformata intre timp in Piscicola Tour SRL, si-a modificat actionariatul, in ecuatie aparand prietenul de-o viata al lui Adrian Nastase, Alexandru Bittner.Acesta a cumparat Piscicola Tour intr-un moment foarte potrivit, cu putin timp inaintea emiterii hotararii de guvern, semnata de Adrian Nastase in 2002, prin care s-a decis concesionarea Deltei Dunarii.
Gaselnita concesionarilor, inventata acum trei ani de fostul guvern PSD, a permis crearea unui monopol piscicol in paradisul de la gurile Dunarii. Acesta a fost concentrat in mainile unui grup restrans de afaceristi, dintre care cel mai influent este Alexandru Bittner, prietenul fostului prim-ministru Adrian Nastase.
Preludiul unui tun de proportii
Piscicola Tour SRL a concesionat in 2002 cinci zone importante din Delta si o amenajare piscicola de la Consiliul Judetean Tulcea. Multi dintre pescarii care se spetesc muncind pentru concesionari rostesc numele lui Alexandru Bittner, omul din spatele Piscicola Tour SRL, cu un soi de teama amestecata cu obida.Motivul este simplu: absolut toti pescarii autorizati care locuiesc in zonele stapanite acum de prietenul fostului prim-ministru sunt obligati sa lucreze pentru Piscicola Tour, in conditiile financiare impuse de firma. Contractul de concesiune detinut de firma reprezentata de Bittner ii da exclusiv acesteia dreptul de a pescui in apele Dunarii. Oamenii isi explica cu greu rapiditatea cu care Piscicola Tour si-a intins tentaculele peste jumatate din rezervatie. Ca atare, prietenia recunoscuta dintre Bittner si Adrian Nastase a devenit folclor printre satenii din Delta Dunarii .
"Lipitoarea"
Insa, paradoxal, bazele actualului imperiu Piscicola Tour s-au pus in luna februarie a anului 2000, cand partidul lui Adrian Nastase nu ajunsese inca la putere. Fosta societate de stat Piscicola Jurilovca SA a incheiat pe 23 februarie 2000 un contract de "asociere in participatiune" cu firma privata Pharmamed Sanitas SRL Bucuresti, condusa de Vladimir Dragos Popa, fiul unui fost ambasador roman in Iugoslavia.Contractul presupunea ca ambele firme sa desfasoare in comun activitati de pescuit, sa exploateze stuful, sa comercializeze produsele obtinute sau sa faca turism. Si activele fostei societati de stat Piscicola Jurilovca au inceput sa fie exploatate in comun: o cladire de birouri, 4,2 hectare de teren, in care intra si 1,5 hectare de la Gura Portitei, pe care s-a ridicat statiunea "Eden", cherhanale, magazii si peste 20 de barci pescaresti. Totodata, lucrul efectiv era prestat de muncitorii fostei firme de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca.In schimb, societatea privata Pharmamed Sanitas SRL s-a obligat la investitii esalonate, in suma de zece miliarde de lei. Acesta a fost preludiul marelui tun.
A doua etapa
Prin incheierea contractului de "asociere in participatiune", partenerii privati au pregatit terenul pentru scopul lor principal: acapararea societatii de stat. Prezentul contract poate fi transformat, cu acordul partilor, in contract de leasing imobiliar, cu clauza ferma de cumparare". Asa suna o clauza strecurata viclean la sfarsitul contractului de asociere. Dupa doar zece luni s-a trecut la a doua etapa: contractul de leasing imobiliar.In acest nou contract, Piscicola Jurilovca SA se obliga sa transmita dreptul de folosinta, pana la achitarea ultimei rate, asupra tuturor activelor sale, catre aceeasi Pharmamed Sanitas. Cu acordul defunctului Fond al Proprietatii de Stat (FPS) a fost stabilit si pretul pentru toate bunurile statului la numai 8,4 miliarde de lei, adica aproximativ 276.000 de dolari. In realitate, numai activele imobiliare valorau 1,5 milioane de dolari, suma fiind estimata la vremea respectiva de un evaluator din Administratia Rezervatiei Biosferei "Delta Dunarii" (ARBDD).In actionariatul firmei Pharmamed Sanitas mai figurau, in afara de Vladimir Dragos Popa, si Marian Matache, asociat cu Bittner si sef al sucursalei constantene a companiei "Astra Asigurari", precum si Bartolomeu Finis, un alt partener de afaceri al lui Bittner, implicat in doua privatizari dubioase ale patrimoniului fostului BTT.
Devalizarea
Deveniti stapani pe bunurile Piscicola Jurilovca SA, patronii firmei Pharmamed Sanitas SRL au infiintat la Gura Portitei o noua firma, Piscicola Tour SRL, controlata de acelasi grup de afaceristi. In decembrie 2001, firma nou infiintata Piscicola Tour a cumparat pur si simplu patrimoniul societatii Piscicola Jurilovca, cu exceptia celor 4,2 hectare de teren, achitand 8,4 miliarde de lei.Adica aceeasi suma mentionata si in contractul reziliat de leasing imobiliar, semnat anterior cu aceiasi oameni. Pe acest ultim contract de vanzare-cumparare, din partea fostei societati de stat si-a pus semnatura directorul general de atunci, Spirache Pascut, numit de APAPS-ul lui Ovidiu Musetescu la conducerea Piscicola Jurilovca. Pascut este un membru notoriu al filialei PSD Prahova.
Bittner intra oficial in schema
In anul 2002 a venit randul lui Bittner sa intre in scena. Astfel, societatea off-shore, Heavy Industry LTD, infiintata la Londra, a cumparat 65,19% din noua Piscicola Tour, de la Bartolomeu Finis, Marian Matache si Vladimir Dragos Popa. Intr-o recenta emisiune TV, Bittner a recunoscut ca este reprezentantul Heavy Industry LTD, aspect, oricum, de notorietate, in Delta. Dupa achizitie, directorul Piscicola Tour a devenit Doru Franculet, omul sau de incredere. Interesant este ca toti cei care au pregatit initial afacerea Piscicola Tour au legaturi de afaceri cu Alexandru Bittner. Bartolomeu Finis este cel mai graitor exemplu. Acesta, alaturi de interpusii lui Bittner, a pus mana pe sapte hectare de teren in Parcul Herastrau din Bucuresti, prin aceeasi formula, a contractului de asociere in participatiune.
Ingineria imobiliara
Epilogul Piscicola Jurilovca SA s-a consumat in septembrie 2003, cand APAPS a scos firma la privatizare. Oficial, cel care a cumparat-o este Doru Franculet, omul lui Alexandru Bittner.Acesta a achitat pe loc 766,4 milioane lei pentru 99,97% din actiunile firmei, in dolari valoarea fiind de 22.700, adica pretul la acea vreme al unui apartament de doua camere in Bucuresti, intr-o zona nu tocmai grozava. Tranzactia finala s-a incheiat intr-o graba nejustificata.In aceeasi perioada a avut loc si ingineria imobiliara prin care cele 4,2 hectare de teren concesionate de Piscicola Jurilovca de la ARBDD au fost scoase din domeniul public si transferate in administratia Agentiei Domeniilor Statului (ADS). Din suprafata totala a terenului, 1,5 hectare sunt ocupate de statiunea " Eden", inaugurata cu mare pompa de Bittner la Gura Portitei. Piscicola, trambulina pentru ocuparea Deltei Oamenii lui Bittner au castigat licitatia de concesiune a 4,2 hectare din Delta folosindu-se de patrimoniul preluat de la fosta societate de stat, Piscicola Jurilovca. Caietul de sarcini al acesteia ii obliga pe concesionarii Deltei sa fie dotati cu echipamente de pescuit. Astfel, terenul, barcile, magaziile, uneltele si cherhanalele statului au umflat portofoliul Piscicola Tour.
Mihai Munteanu, 27 sep 2005 (Evenimentul Zilei)
Sa privesti scoicile invers
Am ridicat din nisipurile Portitei cochilii de scoici impecabil de frumoase. Le-am triat admirandu-le arhitectura, constructia atat de eleganta, sursa de inspiratie pentru multi mesteri din breasla mea. Dar am privit cu atentie, pentru prima oara, o scoica invers. Am descoperit un fel de cioc, un punct unde este concentrata toata forta materiei organizate in aceasta forma, punctul de unde pleaca cochilia sau unde se duce ea.
Motanul Aurica
Aurica mi-a rezolvat dilema, sa-mi iau sau nu cu mine, "in excursie" lap-top-ul. Dupa ce si-a terminat cafeaua de dimineata, Aurica m-a informat ca el ramane acasa drept care are si el voie, in lipsa noastra, sa aiba o existenta virtuala.Asa ca Aurica a fost multumit, oricum nu aveam incotro, dar si eu am fost fericit, trei zile fara informatii, in paradisul celor care nu stiu nimic...
Un lup de Delta spre Gura Portitei...
Poza unui lup de delta, care mi-a vorbit de locurile ascunse ale deltei, despre lacul Reazelm care pare bland, dar se razvrateste si surprinde si mai ales, m-a invatat sa ma uit la o scoica. Sa o privesc din fata, si sa-i surprind figura de pasare de prada. O intalnire folositoare mie, am avut de invatat, si daca nu scapam de el, excursia se transforma in studii de specializare si, te pomenesti, ma punea sa dau si un examen. Dar am scapat, dupa ce l-am tratat cu ciocolata fina si chewing-gum.
La Gura Portitei
Gura Portitei
Alexandru Bittner, definit drept “om de afaceri contestat” in Romania a reusit, avandu-l in spate pe Adrian Nastase sa concesioneze intinderi mari de ape si pamanturi, in delta Dunarii. Daca discutam teoretic perioada capitalismului primitiv in Romania fie vor fi multi care fie vor spune “nu se putea altfel”, fie vor gasi elemente pozitive in privatizarea grabita si probabil de foarte multe ori, frauduloasa a bogatiilor tarii, naturale sau nu.
In orice caz, dupa cum am fost informat de un om al deltei, in brambureala de dupa revolutie Delta Dunarii era in mare pericol, concesionarea ei a dus la o ordine care I-a nemultumit pe foarte multi, mai ales braconierii din zona sau personae care I-au inviditat si ii invidiaza pe cei care “s-au miscat repede”.
Amenajarea turistica de la Gura Portitei este unul dintre rezultatele acestei miscari rapide, un rezultat mult mai simpatic decat ar fi putut sa fie. Si anume, pe limba ingusta de nisip care separa Lacul Reazelm de Marea Neagra, acolo unde se afla o cherhana si instalatiile necesare pescuitului a fost amenajata cu sensibilitate si bun gust o dotare turistica. Materialele de constructie folosite sunt caracteristice zonei, acoperisuri de stuff, tencuiala alba, pietre de rau, etc. Nimic construit pe inaltime care ar fi putut sa tulbure linia orizontului care te inconjoara. Cherhanaua transformata intr-un restaurant, case pe un singur nivel alcatuite din module de camere foarte spatioase cu terasa spre lac, de unde poti pescui in tihna sau unde poti sa-ti legi barca cu motor sau fara , din dotarea pescarului amator instarit. Pe plaja, cabane minuscule pentru turistul mai econom, plus doua tabere de corturi pentru turistii cei mai economi, adica studentii si elevii din clasele mari care vin sa-si petreaca cateva zile in delta.
La Gura Portitei se ajunge cel mai rapid din Jurilovca, dupa Tulcea cealalta poarta spre Delta Dunarii. O salupa “rapida” traverseaza lacul in douazeci de minute, o ambarcatiune improvizata, un vaporas asemanator celor cu care treci Gangele face mai bine de o ora pana pe laguna sau inapoi.
Odata ajuns la Gura Portitei si instalat, te poti bucura si de mare si de lac, dupa preferinte. Nisipul plajei este special, un nisip macinat (de timp) gros, cu scoici superbe pe care le poti allege si le poti admira formele impecabile. Iar marea, neagra asa cum ii spune numele.
Picior de turist strain nu era la Gura Portitei, in afara de mine care sunt pe jumatate. Caci Gura Portitei nu este un loc pentru turistul experimentat si pretentious, sensibil la raportul corect prêt-calitate. Odata ajuns la Portita si daca n-ai venit echipat cu reserve de mancare si bautura de peste mal, atunci intri pe mana furnizorilor de servicii care sunt unul si numai unul. Totul tine de patronul misterios, care hotaraste cat , cum si cand. Camera mai dichisita bate inspre 100 de dolari pe noapte, o masa la restaurant nu costa mai putin de 25 EU pentru doua personae, o bere sau apa minerala sau o inghetata inca un 15 EU pe zi, ca nimic, asa ca bugetul unui cuplu care n-a venit prevenit sau dotat ajunge la un 150 –200 EU pe zi, tout compris. In cele trei zile cat am stat, nimeni nu a intrat in camera sa faca curatenie, s-a intrat o singura data cand s-au adus prosoape proaspete si doua sapunele minuscule.
Daca ai o nevoie urgenta si trebuie sa ajungi la Jurilovca, salupa “rapida” costa 80 de dolari. Magazinul turistului este mai mult de forma, intr-o baraca spatioasa gasesti doua , trei feluri de inghetata, brichete dar nu tigari… si cam atat. Plus doua , trei perechi de shlapi numarul 42.
Tigari poti gasi. La barmanul saritor, care iti vinde un pachet la pretz dublu.
Dar surpriza cea mai grozava, de care site-ul locului nu sufla o vorba, sunt tantarii crunti, hamesiti si neiertatori care, la asfintit se napustesc peste tine si te halesc de sus pana jos. “Shpreiul” salvator nu era nici el de gasit, nu la receptie si nu la magazinul de pe plaja.
Se poate comenta in sus si in jos. La intrebarea pe care oricine si-o pune, atuni cand pleaca, “ma voi intoarce sau nu”, eu raspund, da, ma voi intoarce. Dotat, cu tigari, “shprei” si biscuiti, poate si cu o undita, poate si cu unul dintre amicii mei care au in dotare o salupa”rapida”. Caci oricum as intoarce-o, locul este frumos.
Voi pune la poze cateva imagini, inclusive arta practicata la Portita, n-am aflat numele “artistului” dar poate fi apreciat umorul lui, voit sau nevoit.deD
Alexandru Bittner, definit drept “om de afaceri contestat” in Romania a reusit, avandu-l in spate pe Adrian Nastase sa concesioneze intinderi mari de ape si pamanturi, in delta Dunarii. Daca discutam teoretic perioada capitalismului primitiv in Romania fie vor fi multi care fie vor spune “nu se putea altfel”, fie vor gasi elemente pozitive in privatizarea grabita si probabil de foarte multe ori, frauduloasa a bogatiilor tarii, naturale sau nu.
In orice caz, dupa cum am fost informat de un om al deltei, in brambureala de dupa revolutie Delta Dunarii era in mare pericol, concesionarea ei a dus la o ordine care I-a nemultumit pe foarte multi, mai ales braconierii din zona sau personae care I-au inviditat si ii invidiaza pe cei care “s-au miscat repede”.
Amenajarea turistica de la Gura Portitei este unul dintre rezultatele acestei miscari rapide, un rezultat mult mai simpatic decat ar fi putut sa fie. Si anume, pe limba ingusta de nisip care separa Lacul Reazelm de Marea Neagra, acolo unde se afla o cherhana si instalatiile necesare pescuitului a fost amenajata cu sensibilitate si bun gust o dotare turistica. Materialele de constructie folosite sunt caracteristice zonei, acoperisuri de stuff, tencuiala alba, pietre de rau, etc. Nimic construit pe inaltime care ar fi putut sa tulbure linia orizontului care te inconjoara. Cherhanaua transformata intr-un restaurant, case pe un singur nivel alcatuite din module de camere foarte spatioase cu terasa spre lac, de unde poti pescui in tihna sau unde poti sa-ti legi barca cu motor sau fara , din dotarea pescarului amator instarit. Pe plaja, cabane minuscule pentru turistul mai econom, plus doua tabere de corturi pentru turistii cei mai economi, adica studentii si elevii din clasele mari care vin sa-si petreaca cateva zile in delta.
La Gura Portitei se ajunge cel mai rapid din Jurilovca, dupa Tulcea cealalta poarta spre Delta Dunarii. O salupa “rapida” traverseaza lacul in douazeci de minute, o ambarcatiune improvizata, un vaporas asemanator celor cu care treci Gangele face mai bine de o ora pana pe laguna sau inapoi.
Odata ajuns la Gura Portitei si instalat, te poti bucura si de mare si de lac, dupa preferinte. Nisipul plajei este special, un nisip macinat (de timp) gros, cu scoici superbe pe care le poti allege si le poti admira formele impecabile. Iar marea, neagra asa cum ii spune numele.
Picior de turist strain nu era la Gura Portitei, in afara de mine care sunt pe jumatate. Caci Gura Portitei nu este un loc pentru turistul experimentat si pretentious, sensibil la raportul corect prêt-calitate. Odata ajuns la Portita si daca n-ai venit echipat cu reserve de mancare si bautura de peste mal, atunci intri pe mana furnizorilor de servicii care sunt unul si numai unul. Totul tine de patronul misterios, care hotaraste cat , cum si cand. Camera mai dichisita bate inspre 100 de dolari pe noapte, o masa la restaurant nu costa mai putin de 25 EU pentru doua personae, o bere sau apa minerala sau o inghetata inca un 15 EU pe zi, ca nimic, asa ca bugetul unui cuplu care n-a venit prevenit sau dotat ajunge la un 150 –200 EU pe zi, tout compris. In cele trei zile cat am stat, nimeni nu a intrat in camera sa faca curatenie, s-a intrat o singura data cand s-au adus prosoape proaspete si doua sapunele minuscule.
Daca ai o nevoie urgenta si trebuie sa ajungi la Jurilovca, salupa “rapida” costa 80 de dolari. Magazinul turistului este mai mult de forma, intr-o baraca spatioasa gasesti doua , trei feluri de inghetata, brichete dar nu tigari… si cam atat. Plus doua , trei perechi de shlapi numarul 42.
Tigari poti gasi. La barmanul saritor, care iti vinde un pachet la pretz dublu.
Dar surpriza cea mai grozava, de care site-ul locului nu sufla o vorba, sunt tantarii crunti, hamesiti si neiertatori care, la asfintit se napustesc peste tine si te halesc de sus pana jos. “Shpreiul” salvator nu era nici el de gasit, nu la receptie si nu la magazinul de pe plaja.
Se poate comenta in sus si in jos. La intrebarea pe care oricine si-o pune, atuni cand pleaca, “ma voi intoarce sau nu”, eu raspund, da, ma voi intoarce. Dotat, cu tigari, “shprei” si biscuiti, poate si cu o undita, poate si cu unul dintre amicii mei care au in dotare o salupa”rapida”. Caci oricum as intoarce-o, locul este frumos.
Voi pune la poze cateva imagini, inclusive arta practicata la Portita, n-am aflat numele “artistului” dar poate fi apreciat umorul lui, voit sau nevoit.deD
Gura Portitei- artistul necunoscut
O excursie scurta la Gura Portitei, asezata pe limba ingusta de nisip care separa Lacul Reazelm de Marea Neagra, plina cu surprize si farmec local neasteptat. Inclusiv un artist naiv necunoscut, plin de umor.Ilustrare la un comentariu care urmeaza.
The Iranian trap...
How we fell into the Iranian trap
By Akiva Eldar (Ha-Aretz)
The following is an assortment of telltale signs of the Iranian-Syrian scheme, executed by Hamas and Hezbollah, to ignite the Arab-Israeli arena. All of the signs converge on a single event in time - the G8 gathering. It is hard to tell which is more serious - that the political and military leadership saw the signs and disregarded them, or that it did not see them at all.On July 21, on the morning of the attack in northern Israel, the conservative Iranian newspaper, Jomhuri Islami, chose to print a speech given by Hassan Nasrallah on May 23. The secretary-general of Hezbollah declared that "all of Israel is now within range of our missiles... We possess a more than adequate stock of arms, both qualitatively and quantitatively... Over 2 million Jews live in northern Israel, where there are centers of leisure and touring activities, factories, agriculture, important military airfields and army bases... Our presence in south Lebanon, contiguous to the northern part of occupied Palestine, is our most important stronghold." On July 11, following his meeting with Javier Solana, the individual who holds the nuclear portfolio in the Iranian cabinet, Ali Larijani, departed for a surprise visit to Damascus. Following the visit, Syrian Vice-President Farouk a-Shara announced that "the resistance movements in Lebanon and in Palestine [namely, Hezbollah and Hamas - A.E.] will make the decisions on their own affairs."
That same day, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened the Western states in a television broadcast, warning them against supporting Israel, as "the fury of the Muslim peoples is not limited to the borders of the region... the waves of the explosion... will reach the corrupt forces [the Western states] that support this counterfeit regime." On July 3, Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the Kayhan newspaper and a close associate of Iranian leader Ali Khamenei, wrote that "we mustn't respond to Israel's crimes only in Gaza, only in the occupied lands. Why should the Zionists feel secure when Muslims have no security?" In an interview with the Iranian news agency, Mehr, Shariatmadari said that the Islamic world should not restrict its response to the Zionist attacks only to the Gaza Strip, but should create a situation in which "no Zionist will feel safe, anywhere in the world." He said that the UN was ineffective, because "all of its laws are interpreted to the benefit of those who speak with militancy, and Israel's attack in the Gaza Strip merits a mere expression of sorrow." On June 16, the Asharq Al Awsat newspaper reported the signing of an agreement on military cooperation between Syria and Iran "to repulse the threats [of the U.S. and Israel]." The newspaper emphasized that among other subjects, talks held in Tehran between the Syrian defense minister, Hassan Turkmani, and his Iranian counterpart, Mustafa Mohammed Najjar, focused on the situation in Lebanon and in Palestine, and on assistance to Hamas and to Jihad in their confrontation with the Fatah movement. The Syrian minister officially declared "a common front against Israel's threats... Iran views Syria's security as its own security." Asharq Al Awsat also reported that the minister had visited Tehran at the head of a large delegation accompanied by military and intelligence officers, and had met there with government and army leaders. The newspaper reported that Iran had agreed to underwrite the purchase of military hardware for Syria from Russia, China and Ukraine, in addition to equipping the Syrian army with artillery, ammunition, military vehicles and missiles of Iranian manufacture. Iran would also help to train Syrian naval forces. Black on whiteSyria publicly announced that it had extended its previous agreements with Iran on easing the passage of trucks conveying Iranian weapons into Lebanon. There it was - black on white. All of these signs have been documented in the offices of MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute, in Jerusalem. Yigal Carmon, the founder and director of the institute who spent many years in the defense establishment, placed a call soon after the Hamas attack at Kerem Shalom to a cabinet minister with whom he is acquainted. He informed the minister of his hypothesis that Hamas' deviation from its cease-fire policy (which at the time was expressed in its acceptance of the Prisoners' Document) was related to the pressure placed on Iran vis-a-vis its nuclear program. Carmon told the minister-friend that he perceived an escalation in the threats voiced by Iran, increasing in volume as the date grew closer for Iran's response to the G8 on its nuclear program. He implored the minister to speak with his counterparts around the cabinet table, asking them to bite their lips until after the meeting in Brussels between the diplomatic coordinator of the EU, Javier Solana, and the secretary of the National Security Council of Iran, Ali Larijani. "I told him it was important for the Europeans to understand that the Iranians have not intention of responding to the American compromise proposal," says Carmon, reconstructing the conversation. "I told him that in my assessment, if there was an Iranian plan to repulse the international pressure, then we could expect a threat to develop on our northern sector as well." Three days later, at the height of Operation Summer Rains (in Gaza), the minister telephoned the MEMRI offices in Jerusalem. "You and your doomsday prophecies," the minister teased. The very next day, Hezbollah attacked along the Lebanese border, and Carmon, once again asked to maintain restraint. Carmon also assesses that the acts of terror in Iraq, directed by Iran's Shi'ite proxies, led by Muqtada al-Sader, are also related to the nuclear issue. He predicts that before long, the Iranians will unleash terror attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets around the world. "We are witnessing a most serious failure of our leaders. They allowed the State of Israel to fall into the Iranian trap by responding to Iran's provocation. It was intended to disrupt the discussions of the G8 that were supposed to form an international consensus against the Iranian nuclear program. A responsible leadership would have delayed the response by several weeks, and not played into the Iranian's hands. "We missed the opportunity to expose the Iranian provocations before the G8, and the entire world. We can always go back and launch strikes in Lebanon later on. It would have been possible to set an ultimatum that if the soldiers are not returned within a short period of time, then we will do everything in our power to bring them back. In the meantime, we could have made arrangements for the home front, which was caught unprepared, and deployed three divisions on the border with Syria. "The public is not stupid. It would have understood that a threat to four million people as a result of the Iranian nuclear program is more serious than the killing of soldiers in the north and the kidnapping of their comrades." The explanation for Iran's stubborn insistence on delaying its response to the American proposal until August 22 may be found in the Iranian media. In the past few weeks, reports have been published about an imminent declaration by Ahmadinejad about a "significant development in Iran's nuclear capability." Carmon estimates that they might need another few weeks to finalize their capacity to fully or partially enrich uranium, independent of any other country. It might also have something to do with completing the development of advanced missiles. Fear or angerWhen he heard the prime minister say on Tuesday that the crisis in the north is an "Iranian trick," Carmon did not know if he should be shaking with fear or exploding with anger. "It isn't a trick from the Beitar Jerusalem soccer pitch," he says, furious with Ehud Olmert. "It worries me that even the president of the United States, the leader of the free world, doesn't understand that we aren't talking here about Hezbollah 'shit,' or about regional tensions, but about a crisis on a global scale." "The current crisis has the makings of being able to create a new order in the region, or even a global conflict," stated a MEMRI position paper released yesterday. It refers to the danger of the traditional allies of the United States - Saudi Arabia and Egypt - losing their senior regional status to Iran, which is in the midst of an advanced process of acquiring nuclear capability. At the same time, Russia, which is described as an ally of Iran, is once again taking up position against the United States, as a world power that wields influence in the Middle East and in Europe, where Russia is the principal supplier of oil and gas. As such, the structure of a dual-superpower world is being revived, complete with all the rivalry between the East and West blocs in the Middle East that was characteristic of the Cold War era. Disregard of this threat is especially worrisome to Carmon, as all of this information is openly available to all, including the well-established weapons trail from Syria to Lebanon that was "suddenly" discovered by IDF generals, who have termed it a "smuggling" route. Carmon believes that if decision-makers in the government and the army had considered the Iranian involvement, they would have understood that every Iranian missile, including the C-802 that hit the Israeli missile boat, would be in the possession of Hezbollah. "There are no tricks here," he rails. "The idea is to finally internalize the fact that the IDF is fighting against an Iranian militia, with the logistical support of Iran. The United States has to understand that Putin is working to build a center for uranium enrichment in Siberia, and that Russia is Iran's main supporter. Russia has 6,000 experts there, and knows how to keep its Iranian ally in a sensitive spot. They are certain that we could not endure a home front war, as the Arabs and the Iranians would. In the Iran-Iraq War, two million Moslems died." Carmon is concerned that a few days from now, after it has finished wearing down our air force, Iran, in cahoots with Russia, will "volunteer" to settle the crisis between Israel and Hezbollah, and in exchange for these "glass beads" would win the real diamond - advancing its nuclear program. Carmon also sees significance in the exposure of Iranian and Syrian involvement in the crisis. He believes Israel must pressure the U.S. to bring the G-8 into a special meeting to reach a firm decision against Iran's nuclear program and support of terror groups. Only Iran can stop Hezbollah, and only the U.S. can stop Iran.
By Akiva Eldar (Ha-Aretz)
The following is an assortment of telltale signs of the Iranian-Syrian scheme, executed by Hamas and Hezbollah, to ignite the Arab-Israeli arena. All of the signs converge on a single event in time - the G8 gathering. It is hard to tell which is more serious - that the political and military leadership saw the signs and disregarded them, or that it did not see them at all.On July 21, on the morning of the attack in northern Israel, the conservative Iranian newspaper, Jomhuri Islami, chose to print a speech given by Hassan Nasrallah on May 23. The secretary-general of Hezbollah declared that "all of Israel is now within range of our missiles... We possess a more than adequate stock of arms, both qualitatively and quantitatively... Over 2 million Jews live in northern Israel, where there are centers of leisure and touring activities, factories, agriculture, important military airfields and army bases... Our presence in south Lebanon, contiguous to the northern part of occupied Palestine, is our most important stronghold." On July 11, following his meeting with Javier Solana, the individual who holds the nuclear portfolio in the Iranian cabinet, Ali Larijani, departed for a surprise visit to Damascus. Following the visit, Syrian Vice-President Farouk a-Shara announced that "the resistance movements in Lebanon and in Palestine [namely, Hezbollah and Hamas - A.E.] will make the decisions on their own affairs."
That same day, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened the Western states in a television broadcast, warning them against supporting Israel, as "the fury of the Muslim peoples is not limited to the borders of the region... the waves of the explosion... will reach the corrupt forces [the Western states] that support this counterfeit regime." On July 3, Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the Kayhan newspaper and a close associate of Iranian leader Ali Khamenei, wrote that "we mustn't respond to Israel's crimes only in Gaza, only in the occupied lands. Why should the Zionists feel secure when Muslims have no security?" In an interview with the Iranian news agency, Mehr, Shariatmadari said that the Islamic world should not restrict its response to the Zionist attacks only to the Gaza Strip, but should create a situation in which "no Zionist will feel safe, anywhere in the world." He said that the UN was ineffective, because "all of its laws are interpreted to the benefit of those who speak with militancy, and Israel's attack in the Gaza Strip merits a mere expression of sorrow." On June 16, the Asharq Al Awsat newspaper reported the signing of an agreement on military cooperation between Syria and Iran "to repulse the threats [of the U.S. and Israel]." The newspaper emphasized that among other subjects, talks held in Tehran between the Syrian defense minister, Hassan Turkmani, and his Iranian counterpart, Mustafa Mohammed Najjar, focused on the situation in Lebanon and in Palestine, and on assistance to Hamas and to Jihad in their confrontation with the Fatah movement. The Syrian minister officially declared "a common front against Israel's threats... Iran views Syria's security as its own security." Asharq Al Awsat also reported that the minister had visited Tehran at the head of a large delegation accompanied by military and intelligence officers, and had met there with government and army leaders. The newspaper reported that Iran had agreed to underwrite the purchase of military hardware for Syria from Russia, China and Ukraine, in addition to equipping the Syrian army with artillery, ammunition, military vehicles and missiles of Iranian manufacture. Iran would also help to train Syrian naval forces. Black on whiteSyria publicly announced that it had extended its previous agreements with Iran on easing the passage of trucks conveying Iranian weapons into Lebanon. There it was - black on white. All of these signs have been documented in the offices of MEMRI, the Middle East Media Research Institute, in Jerusalem. Yigal Carmon, the founder and director of the institute who spent many years in the defense establishment, placed a call soon after the Hamas attack at Kerem Shalom to a cabinet minister with whom he is acquainted. He informed the minister of his hypothesis that Hamas' deviation from its cease-fire policy (which at the time was expressed in its acceptance of the Prisoners' Document) was related to the pressure placed on Iran vis-a-vis its nuclear program. Carmon told the minister-friend that he perceived an escalation in the threats voiced by Iran, increasing in volume as the date grew closer for Iran's response to the G8 on its nuclear program. He implored the minister to speak with his counterparts around the cabinet table, asking them to bite their lips until after the meeting in Brussels between the diplomatic coordinator of the EU, Javier Solana, and the secretary of the National Security Council of Iran, Ali Larijani. "I told him it was important for the Europeans to understand that the Iranians have not intention of responding to the American compromise proposal," says Carmon, reconstructing the conversation. "I told him that in my assessment, if there was an Iranian plan to repulse the international pressure, then we could expect a threat to develop on our northern sector as well." Three days later, at the height of Operation Summer Rains (in Gaza), the minister telephoned the MEMRI offices in Jerusalem. "You and your doomsday prophecies," the minister teased. The very next day, Hezbollah attacked along the Lebanese border, and Carmon, once again asked to maintain restraint. Carmon also assesses that the acts of terror in Iraq, directed by Iran's Shi'ite proxies, led by Muqtada al-Sader, are also related to the nuclear issue. He predicts that before long, the Iranians will unleash terror attacks on Jewish and Israeli targets around the world. "We are witnessing a most serious failure of our leaders. They allowed the State of Israel to fall into the Iranian trap by responding to Iran's provocation. It was intended to disrupt the discussions of the G8 that were supposed to form an international consensus against the Iranian nuclear program. A responsible leadership would have delayed the response by several weeks, and not played into the Iranian's hands. "We missed the opportunity to expose the Iranian provocations before the G8, and the entire world. We can always go back and launch strikes in Lebanon later on. It would have been possible to set an ultimatum that if the soldiers are not returned within a short period of time, then we will do everything in our power to bring them back. In the meantime, we could have made arrangements for the home front, which was caught unprepared, and deployed three divisions on the border with Syria. "The public is not stupid. It would have understood that a threat to four million people as a result of the Iranian nuclear program is more serious than the killing of soldiers in the north and the kidnapping of their comrades." The explanation for Iran's stubborn insistence on delaying its response to the American proposal until August 22 may be found in the Iranian media. In the past few weeks, reports have been published about an imminent declaration by Ahmadinejad about a "significant development in Iran's nuclear capability." Carmon estimates that they might need another few weeks to finalize their capacity to fully or partially enrich uranium, independent of any other country. It might also have something to do with completing the development of advanced missiles. Fear or angerWhen he heard the prime minister say on Tuesday that the crisis in the north is an "Iranian trick," Carmon did not know if he should be shaking with fear or exploding with anger. "It isn't a trick from the Beitar Jerusalem soccer pitch," he says, furious with Ehud Olmert. "It worries me that even the president of the United States, the leader of the free world, doesn't understand that we aren't talking here about Hezbollah 'shit,' or about regional tensions, but about a crisis on a global scale." "The current crisis has the makings of being able to create a new order in the region, or even a global conflict," stated a MEMRI position paper released yesterday. It refers to the danger of the traditional allies of the United States - Saudi Arabia and Egypt - losing their senior regional status to Iran, which is in the midst of an advanced process of acquiring nuclear capability. At the same time, Russia, which is described as an ally of Iran, is once again taking up position against the United States, as a world power that wields influence in the Middle East and in Europe, where Russia is the principal supplier of oil and gas. As such, the structure of a dual-superpower world is being revived, complete with all the rivalry between the East and West blocs in the Middle East that was characteristic of the Cold War era. Disregard of this threat is especially worrisome to Carmon, as all of this information is openly available to all, including the well-established weapons trail from Syria to Lebanon that was "suddenly" discovered by IDF generals, who have termed it a "smuggling" route. Carmon believes that if decision-makers in the government and the army had considered the Iranian involvement, they would have understood that every Iranian missile, including the C-802 that hit the Israeli missile boat, would be in the possession of Hezbollah. "There are no tricks here," he rails. "The idea is to finally internalize the fact that the IDF is fighting against an Iranian militia, with the logistical support of Iran. The United States has to understand that Putin is working to build a center for uranium enrichment in Siberia, and that Russia is Iran's main supporter. Russia has 6,000 experts there, and knows how to keep its Iranian ally in a sensitive spot. They are certain that we could not endure a home front war, as the Arabs and the Iranians would. In the Iran-Iraq War, two million Moslems died." Carmon is concerned that a few days from now, after it has finished wearing down our air force, Iran, in cahoots with Russia, will "volunteer" to settle the crisis between Israel and Hezbollah, and in exchange for these "glass beads" would win the real diamond - advancing its nuclear program. Carmon also sees significance in the exposure of Iranian and Syrian involvement in the crisis. He believes Israel must pressure the U.S. to bring the G-8 into a special meeting to reach a firm decision against Iran's nuclear program and support of terror groups. Only Iran can stop Hezbollah, and only the U.S. can stop Iran.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)