‘What lies behind the battle for Qusair’: Opposition media lies and spreading strife

‘A handout photograph distributed by Syria’s national news agency SANA, on May 20,2013, shows a vehicle which it says is an Israeli military vehicle being used by rebel fighters in Qusair near Homs city.’ (Reuters / SANA)

by Nadezhda Kevorkova, RT

As the Syrian army and rebels fight for control of Qusair, it is necessary to realize why the town is strategically important and vital for Shias on both sides of the border, making it a military and media battleground.

There are far more elements surrounding the situation in Qusair than first meet the eye, RT’s Nadezhda Kevorkova reveals.

The army’s advance to Qusair is a key strategic operation. Qusair is near Homs, which is located on the road connecting Damascus with the Mediterranean seaport. And Qusair itself is the closest town to the Lebanese border. So taking control of it allows the forces to control the Lebanese border with the Shias living on both sides. There is an important high point between Qusair and the Lebanese village Al-Qasr. The Syrian army was forced to leave this area in the fall of 2012, so locals lost their protection. Opposition fighters took over the region and tried to chase out the Shias and take control of the high point – there were severe battles here in April 2013. (I was in Lebanon’s Al-Qasr at the time – the village came under heavy fire). But the rebels lost to the fighters from the Syrian People’s Committees. They were able to hold the high point.

Had the opposition forces won over this rather small and seemingly insignificant area, there would’ve been major consequences. The war would’ve spread to Lebanon, and Hezbollah would’ve been obligated to get involved. Jihadists would’ve been able to get into Syria from Lebanon and attack Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in the Beqaa Valley.

Opposition propaganda resources in major mass media and social networks have deployed a campaign in the Islamic world aimed at bolstering the idea that all the Shias are apostates – they are not Muslims, not native to these regions and are simply a tool that is used for proliferating Iranian policy across the Middle East. That is why jihad regards killing a Shia as noble. A number of propaganda resources that different sheikhs were using to broadcast anti-Shia sermons, were involved with the campaign.

Moreover, the mass media are thus instilling the minds of Muslims with the idea that all the Shias, including ordinary peasants, are Hezbollah militants, and Hezbollah, in its turn, is a supplement to the ‘dreadful thugs’ of the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.

Such an approach, which is used by the opposition and backed by the world’s major mass media, has a precise analogy.

The scorched-earth policy was first used in the region by the Irgun Jewish settlers in April 1948, when several Palestinian villages were wiped off the map (Deir Yassin is the most well-known). The goal was simple: the news about the massacre of 254 Palestinians – kids, women and old people would terrify all the rest so much, that they would run away voluntarily. The news about such unprecedented atrocities as, for instance, disembowelling pregnant women did strike terror into people: unarmed and unskilled in terms of war 740 thousand Palestinians fled from their home villages becoming refugees. Zionist ideologists still claim that the Palestinians are not native to Palestine and they were invited there as migrant workers, so they are either Bedouins, or nomads, or Gypsies from the Middle East who didn’t have any skills in agriculture and didn’t know how to farm.

This is also the reason that has been driving the mass-media campaign to discredit Hezbollah that has been accused of allegedly fighting against the Syrian people. Video footage and photographs of fallen Hezbollah fighters dating back to the 2006 Lebanon War have been circulated as “proof” that Hezbollah is involved in Syria and suffering losses. Back in 2006, 800 Hezbollah fighters put up resistance to the ground invasion of Lebanon by Israel, and these numbers were officially announced by the party leader Hasan Nasrallah.

I met with families that were forced to flee Syrian villages by the border. These were mostly large families who feared that their women, wives and daughters, would be raped by the opposition fighters and criminals that accompany them. Many also said that it was their strategy to intimidate the local population on purpose to have the houses vacated. Nonetheless many stayed and organized community defense volunteer squads to protect themselves from the rebel forces and mercenaries with arms in their hands.

The battle of Qusair has been of strategic importance, but not only that – Qusair is the only town, however small (with 50,000 people of population ) that had been given up by the government forces in the past – while the rest of the towns in Syria are under the government’s control. Mass-media that are telling their audience that the purpose of the battle of Qusair was “to regain control over the Mediterranean coast” and “re-deploy the government forces to Aleppo” are lying. The army is already in full control of the coast. Last Sunday, the army launched a massive offensive on all transit routes for weapons and supplies coming into the country.

As of today, Qusair is surrounded by the Syrian army, which is also in control of the downtown area. An escape corridor is being kept open for the fleeing population. The militants who fail to use it are contained in town’s quarters.

As for the losses, all the numbers cited are pure speculation and part of the propaganda attack on Syria. For example, the opposition initially reported online that they had killed “90 Hezbollah militants,” yet after a while changed the number to 30, and that’s in addition to the Syrian army’s losses of 20 soldiers reported by the army itself.

Armed groups In Syria continue shelling Hermel

Moqawama

At least five rockets from the Syrian side of the border with Lebanon landed in Hermel Saturday leaving no casualties.

According to information, one rocket fell near Hermel’s Public Hospital on the eastern entrance to the city while the other three hit a hill overlooking the Assi River, a few kilometers from Hermel.

Several rockets have targeted Hermel over the past few weeks.

Meanwhile, the National News Agency reported that Saturday missiles originating from the Syrian side did not score any casualties.

However, “the shelling left behind a prevailing atmosphere of anticipation and caution in the region.”

On April 14, the armed groups’ shelling led to the martyrdom of two Lebanese civilians.

Days ago, Hizbullah Secretary General of Hizbullah His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah urged the Lebanese citizens in the region to show self-restraint in face of the armed groups continuous shelling on their region.

S. Nasrallah: We support Syrian resistance, we’ll receive game-changing arms

Al Manar

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah declared readiness of Lebanese Resistance to receive any game-changing weapons the Syrian Arab Republic might offer, stressing that Resistance stands by the side of Syrian popular resistance until liberating the occupied Golan.

During a televised speech he delivered on the Al-Nour Radio silver jubilee ceremony held at Risalat Hall in Beirut on Thursday, Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that Syrian leadership prove its strength of nerve and its wise leadership that oversees the battle with the Zionists through a strategic mind, pointing out that this defiant and resistant axis has made achievements and toppled a lot of colonial schemes through steadfastness and prudence.

“We – the Resistance – declare we are ready to receive any game-changing weapons, and we are ready to possess and protect them, and use them to defeat the aggression against our people, our land and our holy places,” his eminence said.

Hezbollah Secretary General made it clear that the true goal behind the latest Zionist raids against Syria was to harm its capabilities, to remove it from the conflict equation against the enemy, and to tell the Syrians that continuing to supply Resistance with military aid will lead to their regime downfall.

However, Sayyed Nasrallah noted that Syria responded to the Zionist aggression by foiling all its goals through its persistent support to the Lebanese Resistance and opening the door to popular resistance in its occupied territories of Golan.

“Tell me about a single Arab regime or state of the supporters of the Arab Spring who have dared to offer the resistance in Lebanon and Palestine a rocket or a single bullet,” Sayyed Nasrallah stated.

Reiterating that Syria has long been a conduit for Iranian weapons bound for Resistance in Lebanon, his eminence went on to say that “everyone knows what Syria has offered to resistance movements, especially in Lebanon and Palestine.”

“The same as Syria stood by Lebanon, we – the Resistance in Lebanon – declare that we will stand by the Syrian popular resistance that is aimed at liberating the Syrian Golan.”

Commenting on the Russian-U.S. talks on a political solution for the Syrian crisis, Sayyed Nasrallah said “it is shameful that the U.S. is being depicted as Syria’s savior,” stating that Arabs are climbing the debris of Syria giving the Americans what they want, due to their assumption that Iran is besieged.

Turning to the Palestinian cause, the priority of Sayyed Nasrallah’s speech, his eminence indicated that Arab regimes are dealing with the Palestinians as if they are a historical burden, which they wanted to get rid of since long time but they didn’t have the courage to do so.

“For those who want to preserve al-Aqsa Mosque and the Christian holy sites, and for those who want to bring back Jerusalem to the Palestinian people and to the Ummah, resistance is their only choice. The choice is neither the Arab League nor the U.N., the choice has always been the resistance,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

“Today, the risks threatening the Palestinian cause are the land and the identity,” he added, stressing that recognizing the Jewish nature of the Occupied Land means the battle is over, and all what’s happening in the region is helping the enemy to grab chances after the extreme state of horror it lived during the Arab Spring and peoples’ awakening.

“Unfortunately we’re a nation that wastes a lot of chances,” his eminence stated.

“Palestinian people were aspiring that Arab Spring might make Arabs more adherent to their rights, but the scene of the Arab foreign ministers making a dangerous compromise, with the U.S. secretary of state sitting in the middle, indicates that the Palestinian cause is in danger,” he added.

“Unfortunately, there are people who believe that priority is somewhere else. It is not the Al-Aqsa Mosque, but it is how to drag Syria and Iraq into war, and how to push Lebanon into the abyss,” Hezbollah Secretary General said.

“Arabs are unwilling to pay for bread for the Sunni Muslims of Somalia dying of hunger or to aid the Syrian refugees in Lebanon or to give real support for the Jerusalemites to stay in their land, but they are willing to pay compensations for the Jews,” he was quoted as saying.

Sayyed Nasrallah expressed beliefs that what required from Arab regimes “is a formal Arab recognition – not only a Palestinian one – of the Jewish nature of State, which poses cultural, humanitarian, economic, security and demographic threats.”

Praising the Jordanian Parliamentary stance regarding its vote on relations with the Zionist entity, Sayyed Nasrallah told the Palestinians that they won’t find anyone to stand by their side other than those who have stood by them since years, noting that the Palestinians benefit from any serious efforts to achieve a political settlement in Syria and prevent its fall into the hands of the Takfiris, the Americans and the Zionists.

Touching on the Palestinian resistance factions, his eminence revealed that if a day to come when Palestinian brothers unfold what they whisper in private meetings, they will say that “no one offered support for us as offered by President Bashar al-Assad.”

Addressing the Lebanese internal affairs, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed that national unity requires a real national partnership cabinet to be formed and the parliamentary elections to be held on time, reiterating Hezbollah’s commitment to the Orthodox Gathering proposal and the party’s refusal of political vacuum.

On the Lebanese pilgrims kidnapped in Syria’s Aazaz around a year ago, his eminence revealed that Hezbollah has done what should be done and things will take a positive course.

“Government must shoulder the rest of the file,” he added.

Also on the rockets fired by Syrian insurgents on Lebanon and landed in Hermel northern region, Sayyed Nasrallah vowed that the party will address the issue “and God willing there will be a solution.”

Thursday’s ceremony commemorated the 25th anniversary of the establishment of Hezbollah’s al-Nour radio station, which Sayyed Nasrallah said it has been committed to credibility and honesty along its course.

“According to our experience, honesty is the power point of any psychological war we fought against the enemy,” his eminence stated.

Thanking all workers at al-Nour for their steadfastness and faith, Sayyed Nasrallah said that the radio station was launched as part of the resistance course “with emerging experience, great hope for the future and self-confidence that we are capable of making victory.”

“The most serious dilemma faced by many of the world and Arab media is the lack of credibility, disinformation and fabrication of facts, as well as lying in politics, relations and news,” his eminence said, pointing at the true mission of media outlets in reporting news without inventing or fabricating stories.

“Media of Resistance was able to help the Nation to steadfast, to indicate the right and defend Resistance against accusations of terrorism and subordination,” he noted.

“Media of Resistance will keep on performing this Jihadi duty along with all Resistance facilities looking confidently to victory,” Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah vowed in his speech.

Sayyed Nasrallah: Hizbullah not responsible for drone, political settlement only solution in Syria

by Nour Rida, Moqawama

Hizbullah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah delivered a televised speech on Tuesday, in which he tackled two sensitive issues; the drone “Israel” claimed to have downed a few days ago and the Syrian crisis and its different dimensions.

He first congratulated the Lebanese on the Birth anniversary of Lady Zahraa, Prophet Mohammad’s daughter, also on Labor Day.

Hizbullah Not Responsible For Drone

To begin with, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled the drone issue, noting that “A few days ago, the “Israelis” claimed to have downed an unmanned drone which was launched from Lebanon. “Israeli” media outlets and analysts accused us of being behind this “honor,” although we are not responsible.”

Also directly, following the claims made by some “Israeli” officials -after the first few minutes following the downing of the drone- some Lebanese parties also accused Hizbullah of this incident, His Eminence stated.

“Hizbullah has not sent a drone across Lebanon’s southern border, and has denied these claims by issuing a one-line statement issued the same night of the alleged incident,” Hizbullah leader asserted. He assured “Everyone knows that Hizbullah has the courage to take responsibility for any act it performs, especially if it’s against the enemy, and a lot of reservations and accusations are not a source of concern to the party.”

Wondering who might be behind the incident, Sayyed Nasrallah demonstrated that “the drone’s wreckage has not been found yet and no footage or evidence has been provided by any media outlet,” reminding that there is no proof the drone has in fact been downed.

Moreover, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that “”Israelis”, despite all the technology they possess, have not yet been able to specify publicly where the drone originated from, and rather have different analysis and theories.”

His Eminence iterated that there have been no “official” accusations made by “Israel” against Hizbullah, only media analysis so far, adding “”Israel” put certain claims on the table analyzing the drone source, one is that the Iranian revolutionary guards stand behind the drone incident, but this is an impossible and illogical hypothesis.”

“Another hypothesis says that one of our friends in Lebanon or Palestine has the capability of sending a small plane over Occupied Palestine, we have no information or index that proves this hypothesis,” Sayyed Nasrallah further continued.

“Also, there is a hypothesis that an unfriendly party, other than “Israel”, had launched the drone without the knowledge of Lebanon or Hizbullah. The drone could have been launched from Lebanon or any other place with the aim of drawing a direct response from the “Israelis” in order to push Lebanon into a confrontation with Israel amid the tense situation in the region, but there is nothing that can confirm this,” he elaborated.

It could be that “Israel” sent the drone into Lebanese airspace, and then directed it back into “Israel”, in an attempt to realize a bunch of political and psychological goals especially with the help of “Israeli” agents, Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out.

“I hope that opposition political forces do not play on the “Israeli” issue in an effort to outbid us, because this is a very sensitive issue,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

He also assured “If there is anyone who thinks that the Resistance in Lebanon, as a result of regional events, is in a weak, fragile, or confused position, they are deeply mistaken. We will confront any aggression against Lebanon and we emerge be victorious.”

Attempts to Weaken our Position Ineffective

Moving on to the Syrian file, Sayyed Nasrallah tackled several points. His Eminence said “over the course of the last few weeks, a lot was said in the media by others in a failed attempt to weaken our position and play on our nerves,” assuring this is ineffective as “We have been living in the heart of the psychological and military warfare since 30 years.”

Among the concentrated lies were claims that tremendous numbers of Hizbullah martyrs are falling in Syria, which was propagated by media outlets such as Future TV and al-Arabiya. “Some Lebanese and Arab media outlets spoke about the numbers of Hizbullah martyrs dying in Syria clashes and about mass graves. The numbers that such media outlets have quoted add up to approximately 1000 martyrs. Who can hide a thousand men in a country as small as Lebanon, where everyone knows everything about everyone?” His Eminence questioned.

He assured that Hizbullah martyrs are buried publicly and that the Resistance is not ashamed but rather proud of this. “I thank the families of the martyrs for their historical awareness and the remarks attributed to them increase our determination to continue the path.”

Crisis Goal to Destroy Syria

Sayyed Nasrallah recalled “If we take into consideration what has been happening during the past two years in Syria, and all the international opinions that exist on the Syrian situation, we can see clearly the aim is not to eliminate Syria from the Resistance axis, or from the Arab-”Israeli” conflict. We get to only one conclusion that the Syrian crisis goal has become to destroy Syria as a country, people, and army,” Sayyed Nasrallah accentuated.

According to Sayyed Nasrallah, the armed groups in Syria are linked to foreign intelligence agencies and to foreign countries.

Also, he stated that “the chemical weapons “game” is nothing but an effort being made by foreign governments to find an excuse to intervene in Syria and destroy it.”
More on to the game played against Syria, Sayyed Nasrallah emphasized that “Throughout the two past years, there has been a flood of fatwas and calls for Jihad; which is not new to Lebanon, such Jihad calls date back two years and have nothing to do with the accusations against Hizbullah.”

Polical Settlement Required in Syria

“The first camp, the Syrian rebels, have resorted to the ugliest forms of combat, slaughter and beheading, all the way to seeking an international political and military intervention aimed at destroying Syria the same as other countries were destroyed, and this approach is backed by religious scholars and political leaders. They are killing even (Muslim) scholars and abducting (Christian) clergymen.”
Describing his side as the second camp, Sayyed Nasrallah assured “we have been paying attention to the impact of the Syrian crisis on the entire region and we’ve been always calling for a political solution. Also, what is happening in Syria endangers the Palestinian cause, urging “We call for a political solution and political settlement for the Syrian crisis.”

Addressing the Syrian opposition, Sayyed Nasrallah decisively said “You will not manage to take Damascus or topple the regime as the battle is long although we have never called for combat. You cannot topple the regime militarily and the facts on the ground prove that, although you are fighting the Syrian army and the pro-regime popular forces.”

Sayyed Nasrallah noting their inability to topple the regime assured “no Iranian forces have entered Syria until the moment and that Some Iranian experts have been in Syria since decades; any other claims are unfounded,” wondering “If this is the situation so far, how things would be in the future should resistance forces and other nations intervene?”

Concerning al-Qusayr town, Sayyed Nasrallah stated that there are more than 30,000 Lebanese residing in it. Over the course of the last few months, the Syrian army has had to retreat from the towns in al-Qusayr. This has led to these various towns’ residents having to face the rebels on their own.
He assured “We will not leave the Lebanese residents of al-Qusayr stand alone, and we will do anything to help them especially that the Lebanese state has failed to protect these towns located on the border with Syria.”

Defending Sayyida Zeinab Shrine, Grave Consequences If Attacked

Moving on to the religious shrine, the mausoleum of Prophet Mohammad’s granddaughter, al-Sayyida Zeinab that has been already targeted many times by the terrorist groups, Sayyed Nasrallah said this is a very sensitive issue, given the fact that certain extremist groups have announced that if they reach this shrine, they will destroy it. The shrine is located in al-Sayyeda Zeinab area in Damascus.
“Some extremist groups plan to execute their threats with regards to the shrine in al-Sayida Zeinab, and if such a crime were to take place, it will carry with it grave consequences,” His Eminence warned.

However, Sayyed Nasrallah pointed out that there are people who defend this area, assuring “these people are working to prevent strife, and are not the ones who are creating it.”

“It is not enough for the opposition, or the entity that goes by the name of the National Syrian Coalition, to voice its disapproval of the destruction of this sacred shrine. We call on the countries supporting these groups to take responsibility for this crime if it takes place,” he called.

Lebanese Aazaz Abductees Away From Political Dispute

Moving on to the Lebanese abductees’ case (of Aazaz), Sayyed Nasrallah underlined “The Lebanese government has failed to effectively resolve the outstanding issue of the Lebanese abductees.”

He wondered “What do the abductors want? Do they seek a ransom? Or do they want Syrian detainees to be released from Lebanese prisons? Or are they looking to influence on politics in the region in some way?”
Addressing the abductors Sayyed Nasrallah said “You can’t pressure us into taking a certain political stance regarding the Syrian crisis by abducting people. However, do you expect us to watch the abductees’ families protest, and not lift a finger in response?”

Some are saying that the release of the abductees is related to a certain political resolution being made, but we believe this issue should be kept away from any interior political dispute.”

“We do not want conflict in Lebanon, we do not want our country to become involved with the crisis,” His Eminence said and concluded that everyone in Lebanon must work towards bringing the Syrian crisis to an end.

Zionists and Gulf Monarchs ponder: Pushing Al Qaeda to take on Hezbollah

(War recipe-File photo)

by FRANKLIN LAMB, source

Beirut

“This is one damn fine idea, what took us so long to see a simple solution that was right in front of our eyes for Christ’s sake”, Senator John McCain of “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” and “no-fly zones for Syria” notoriety, reportedly demanded to know from Dennis Ross during a recent Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) brain storming session in Washington DC.

Ross, a founder of WINEP with Israeli government start up cash (presumably reimbursed unknowingly, one way or another by American taxpayers) and currently WINEPs “Counselor”, as in “consigliere” reportedly responded to the idea of facilitating Al Qeada to [fight]  against Hezbollah with the comment: “Shiites aren’t the only ones seeking death to demonstrate their ‘resistance’ to whatever. Plenty of other Muslims also want to die as we saw last week in Boston. Let ‘em all go at it and Israel can sweep out their s— when it’s over.”

One Congressional staffer attending the WINEP event emailed to Beirut: “Dennis spoke in jest—well I assumed he did- but who knows anymore? Things are getting ever crazier inside some of these pro-Israel ‘think tanks’ around here.”

Featured on the front page of its 4/25/13 edition, the Zionist compliant New York Times writes that the Assad regime is apparently recovering but, “it must be understood that for all of the justified worries about the (al Qaeda affiliated) rebels “Assad remains an ally of Iran and Hezbollah.”

The Times adopts the views of Islamophobe, Daniel Pipes, who recommends that the US try to keep the two sides in Syria fighting as long as possible until they destroy each other. Pipes, now serving as an advisor to John McClain, wrote in the Washington Times of 4/11/13 “ Evil forces pose less danger to us when they make war on each other. This keeps them focused locally, and it prevents either one from emerging victorious and thereby posing a greater danger. Western powers should guide enemies to a stalemate by helping whichever side is losing, so as to prolong their debilitating conflict.”

Both Jeffrey Feltman, U.N. Under-Secretary General for Political Affairs and Susan Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the U.N, have at a minimum impliedly joined in the intriguing idea of sic’ing Jabhat al Nusra on the Party of God. This scheme, if launched, would be Feltman’s 14th attempt to topple Hezbollah and defeat the Lebanese National Resistance to the occupation of Palestine since he first arrived in Beirut from Tel Aviv in 2005 to become US Ambassador to Lebanon. This observer, among others in this region sense that given the aura still enveloping the American Embassy here, that Jeffrey never really left his Lebanese ambassadorial post and continues to occupy this position from his new UN office.

This week Feltman warned that the spillover of Syria’s war continues to be felt in Lebanon as Susan Rice, echoed him and condemned Hezbollah for “undermining the country’s “dissociation policy.” The latter being a bit obscure in meaning but connoting something like sitting around doing nothing while this country is being shelled by [fighters] from among the 23 countries currently fighting in Syria. Feltman informed the media on 4/22/13 that “The Secretary-General is concerned by reports that Lebanese are fighting in Syria both on the side of the regime and on the side of the opposition, hopes that the new government will find ways to promote better compliance by all sides in Lebanon with the “disassociation policy.”

Given current divisions in Lebanon that will not happen anymore than Lebanon’s June 9th Parliamentary elections will be held on time.

For her part, Susan lectured the UN Security Council that “Hezbollah actively enables Assad to wage war on the Syrian people by providing money, weapons, and expertise to the regime in close coordination with Iran.” This position was expressed also through a statement by US. State Department spokesman, Patrick Ventrell, who said that Washington “has always been clear concerning Hezbollah’s shameful role and the support it is providing for the Syrian regime and the violence it is inducing in Syria.” Ventrell added: “We were clear from the start concerning the destructive role played by Iran as well as the Iranian role.”

Several Israeli agents in Congress are today promoting a Jabhat el Nusra-Hezbollah war even as the Obama administration terror-lists the – group. Meanwhile, Senator Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), McCain’s neocon Islamaphobe acolyte, goes a bit further and explains to Fox News, once Assad falls and Hezbollah is out of the picture “We can deal with these – fellas.”

Recent history in Libya instructs otherwise. As Turkish commentator Cihan Celik recently noted: “A divorce with al-Nusra will not be easy in Syria.”

The past two years in Libya, that shadow of a country, reveals countless examples, three witnessed firsthand by this observer, during the long hot summer of 2011. What we saw was Gulf sponsors and funders offering young men, often unemployed, $ 100 per month, free cigarettes, and a Kalashnikov to [fight]. Plenty down and out lads still accept these offers in Libya, as they do in Syria. One reason why the militias proliferated so quickly in Libya and never melted away was the phenomenon of a wannabe [fighters] deciding to be a leader and recruiting perhaps a brother or two, maybe a few cousins or tribe members, and presto, they have created a militia with power they never dreamed of. Their new life can offer many perceived benefits from running rough shod over the civilian populations and setting up myriad mini but potent criminal enterprises specializing in kidnappings, robberies, drugs, trafficking in women, and assassinations for cash. How many of these young men have turned in their weapons in Libya and returned to their former lives? Or will do so when instructed by the likes of McCain or Graham?

On 4/24/13 Jabhat Al-Nusra Front intensified its threats to officials here including the Lebanese president by releasing a challenge from its media office: “…we inform you – and you may think of that as a warning or an ultimatum – that you must take immediate measures to restrain Hezbollah, otherwise, the fire will reach Beirut. If you do not abide by this within 24 hours, we will consider that you are taking part in the massacres committed by the Hezbollah members and we will unfortunately have to burn everything in Beirut.” In addition they are calling [to fight] and the establishment of the “Resistance Factions [to fight] against the Regime in Syria” and also in Saida and Tripoli, Lebanon.

Israeli officials appear to be in agreement with the Ross/Pipes proposal to arrange for Al Qeada to launch a war against Hezbollah. The Director for External Affairs at “The Mosche Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, repeatedly claimed that the Shia are the real threat to Israel, not the Sunni and with the least threat coming from the Gulf monarchs. He offered the view recently that “Israel is now a partner of the Sunni Arab states.” Indeed, Israel hopes that Hezbollah will forget Israel when tasked with trying repel Al Nusra and other al Qaeda affiliate attacks.

According to various Israel officials who have issued statements on the subject, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan and several other members of the Arab League constitute an “alliance of anxiety for Israel” because they claim that “Sunni Arabs are not as competent as the Shia and Iran and as a result they express doubts that Israel can rely on the Sunni states in the same way that the Sunni states can reply on Israel.”

In a documentary about the Iraq war, an American soldier explains: “Actually, we don’t really have much of a problem with the Sunnis. It’s the Shias who we are afraid of. The problem has something to do with their leader who was killed centuries ago and these fellas are willing to lay their life down for the guy. Anyhow, that is that they told us in Special Ops class.”

Al Nusra fighters currently occupying parts the south west areas of Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp in south Damascus, recently expressed eagerness to fight Hezbollah which they claim would give them credibility with Sunni Muslims and, oddly, in this observers view, “ credibility with western countries”, who supposedly are al Qaeda’s sworn enemies. It’s sometimes hard to know who precisely is whose enemy these days in Syria as the rebels continue using areas east and southwest of Damascus as rear bases and as gateways into the capital.

Despite boasts to the contrary from [armed groups] types in Syria and Lebanon, it is not clear to this observer if [fighters] and al Qaeda-affiliated groups living among Hezbollah communities in Lebanon like Fatah al Islam, Jund al Sham or Osbat al Ansar which have been here for years would actually join the Zionist promoted anti-Hezbollah [fight].

But it is evident that some Lebanese [groups] directly connected to al Qaeda do have the ability to target Hezbollah. Elements from each of these groups are startling to associate and identify with al Nusra inspired partly by the latter’s successful military operations of Jabhat al Nusra in Syria. Again, we saw the same thing in Libya. Enthusiastic, ambitious young men who want to improve their lot in life try to go with a winner. According to sources in the Ain al Hilweh Palestinian refugee camp, – leaders such as Haytham and Mohammed al Saadi, Tawfic Taha, Oussama al Shehabi and Majed al Majed are recruiting followers and fighters in Lebanon and offer a ticket out the the squalid army surrounded, Syrian refugee inflated camp.

Homs-based media activist Mohammad Radwan Raad claims that “the embattled residents of the rebel-controlled Homs province town of Al-Qusayr welcome Saida, Lebanon based Sunni Sheikh Ahmad al-Assir’s call [to fight] in Syria.” Claims Raad, “Al-Qusayr residents welcome Assir’s call and hope the Lebanese people help kick out Hezbollah members in the area…We need anyone who can get rid of them.” This week Assir urged his followers to join Syrian rebels fighting troops loyal to President Bashar al-Assad and Lebanese Shiite movement Hezbollah. Al-Qusayr has been under rebel control for more than a year and on the scene reports indicate that it is about to be returned to central government control.

In response, two Salafist Sunni Lebanese sheikhs urged their followers to go to Syria to fight – in defense of Qusayr’s Sunni residents. “There is a religious duty on every Muslim who is able to do so… to enter into Syria in order to defend its people, its mosques and religious shrines, especially in Qusayr and Homs,” Sheikh Ahmed al-Assir told his followers. For now, experts say, such calls on the part of Lebanon’s Salafists are largely bluster because the movement is far from able to wield either the arsenal or the fighting forces of Hezbollah.

Local analysts like Qassem Kassir argue that Jabhat al Nusra and friends are not organized enough to fight against Hezbollah in a conventional war, but they could cause great damage by organizing bomb attacks against the Party of God’s bases and militants. The latter would be enough initially for Ross and WINEP and their Zionist handlers. Creating chaos in Lebanon being one of their goals but more importantly weakening the National Lebanese Resistance led by Hezbollah and also challenging Syria and Iran.

In a recent speech, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah offered his party’s view about a promoted Sunni-Shia clash with Al-Nusra, AlQaida and all the groups which flocked to Syria, saying that what was wanted of them by those who sent them was to kill and get killed in Syria, in a massacre which will only serve the enemies of the Arabs and Muslims.

The coming months will reveal to us if the several pro-Zionist Arab regimes and Islamophobes including those at WINEP and other Israel first “think-tanks” are delusional in believing a “simple solution” in John McCain’s words, to those resisting the Zionist occupation of Palestine would be to assist Jabhat el Nusra type [groups] to make war against Hezbollah. And whether they could defeat Hezbollah or even whether Jabhat al Nusra and friends are capable of igniting yet another catastrophe in this region.

‘When will we ever learn?’

Thirty Years After the Bombing at the US Embassy in Lebanon

by FRANKLIN LAMB, source

This observer has no idea if the American Ambassador here in Beirut, Maury Connolly or Secretary of State Kerrey has ever listened to Marlene Dietrich’s classic October 1965 performance of Pete Seeger’s “Where Have All The Flowers Gone” still stunning, deeply moving and available on the Internet.

But on this 30th anniversary of the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut I found myself near the old embassy site on the sea front for personal reasons, and stepped down the block below the American University of Beirut (AUB) to meet a friend at Starbucks. When I entered, maybe the 5th tme my life I have been to a SB, since I don’t drink coffee and for political reasons tend to avoid the chain, but I noticed that someone was playing Dietrich’s classic.

Reading the reports of the American Ambassador and Secretary of State’s political comments on the embassy events, three decades on, Marlene’s enchanting deep voiced, “When will they every learn?”, numbed me.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry slammed Hezbollah in the Lebanese media on the anniversary of the 1983 suicide bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut that killed 52 people, saying “ On this 30th anniversary of the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, the United States celebrates 30 years of close cooperation with the people of Lebanon that proves the enemies of democracy failed,” he said from Washington, especially at the people-to-people level – and this proves the terrorists’ goals were not achieved.”

For her part, U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon Maura Connelly said the bombing opened a new chapter in America’s history in the Middle East. Connelly said the explosion taught Americans that “peaceful intentions were not enough to protect us from those who would use terror to achieve their aims in the Middle East.”

What both officials avoid is the subject of who was committing the terrorism in Lebanon when these events, including the US Marine Barracks and the Embassy again in 1984.

Regarding Hezbollah, which would not be a formed organization ready to announce itself publicly until 1985, CIA operative Robert Baer and his team assigned to investigate the Embassy bombing concluded there was not enough reliable evidence to support the theory that the Party of God was responsible. Among the more than three dozen militias of various persuasion operating just in Beirut in the early 1980’s, Islamic Jihad did claim responsibility.

The American officials also failed to take into consideration the fact that the US Embassy, which, Washington has never denied, had at the time the largest contingent of CIA agents working out of the Embassy and performing Command and Control functions for the US Marine base in South Beirut than in any other capital city except Moscow. When the US Embassy became a command post, by the terms of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic relations it lost its protected status

. The US Marines, as a hostile military force in Lebanon never had protection and as it targeted civilians the Marine base too became a legitimate target. Politicking the event three decades later, notwithstanding, there was no terrorism involved in either operation.

The reason is because despite Reagan administration claims, and Ambassador Connelly’s assertions this week, the US forces were not “a neutral peacekeeping unit” as hyped. Rather, they were enemy combatants fighting and killing on one side of a civil war conflict. And when the New Jersey‘s shells had killed hundreds of people, mostly Shiites and Druze. It was not surprising that his memoir, General Colin Powell (at the time an assistant to Caspar Weinberger) noted that “When the shells started falling on the Shiites, they assumed the American ‘referee’ had taken sides.”

Some examples. On 14 December, 1983 the New Jersey fired 11 projectiles from three of her 16 inch (406 mm) guns and the rate of three per minute each at positions inland of Beirut. These were the first 16 inch (406 mm) shells fired for effect anywhere in the world since New Jersey ended her time on the gunline in Vietnam in 1969.

According to news accounts by reporters in Beirut at the time, the New Jersey bombardment sometimes began at 1:25 P.M. and ended at 11 P.M. followed by American fighter-bombers which could be heard flying over Beirut in search of targets.

On September 19 1983, the New Jersey and other US warships began shelling Druze, Syrian and Palestinian positions in the Chouf Mountains outside Beirut. The battleship New Jersey with its 2,700 pound shells (“flying Volkswagens”) participated led the action.

On 8 February 1984, New Jersey fired almost 300 shells at Druze and Shi’ite positions in the hills overlooking Beirut. Another] of the massive projectiles rained down on the Bekaa valley east of Beirut and constituted the heaviest shore bombardment since the Korean War.

The accuracy of New Jersey‘s guns was a scandal in US government circles and was consistently called into question. An investigation into New Jersey’s gunfire effectiveness in Lebanon, led Marine colonel Don Price, found that many of the ship’s shells had missed their targets by as much as 10,000 yards (9,140 m) and therefore may have inadvertently killed civilians. Records and oral hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee could not be clearer and Secretary Kerrey and Ambassador Connelly know this. Tim McNulty, a correspondent for the Chicago Tribune based in Lebanon at the time wrote: “Everybody loved the New Jersey until she fired her guns. Once she fired, it was obvious she couldn’t hit anything,” Well, as the citizens of Lebanon know well it did hit things. Mainly it bombed innocent civilians and their property and Lebanon’s infrastructure.

As Secretary of State Kerrey knows well, from his nearly three decades in the US Senate and his four years (2009-2013) as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee the actions of the USS New Jersey itself was arguably terrorism and some experts in the International Law Bureau of the Pentagon have said as much.

This observer lived for more than a year in the Chouf village of Sweifeit, a beautiful place set high above the remains of the US marine barracks, the Beirut airport and the Mediterranean Sea where the USS Jersey and other US Sixth fleet warships are normally positioned when they come calling on Lebanon.

Neighbors still recall what some here call, “the terror days of USS New Jersey” and its shelling with both 26 inch and 19 inch shells, the former weighing up to 2,700 pounds depending how they are loaded and with what explosive mixture. Clearly visible around Sweifeit and dozens of other smaller towns, are the remains of houses and buildings not yet repaired from the intense shelling. Also shown, are indications in the ground at various locations when unexploded shells remain imbedded. One wonders if as part of the ‘special enduring friendship between the United States and Lebanon on a person to person level” that the president spoke of this week, he might order the Pentagon to defuse and removed these huge bombs. If so he would distinguish his administration from that of the occupiers of Palestine who for more than three decades have targeted various parts of Lebanon with American supplied and US taxpayer paid weapons, including literally millions of US made cluster bombs during the 33 day Israeli aggression in 2006.

It is appropriate to honor the victims of the 1983 US Embassy bombing and the other tragedies in Lebanon during this period under review.

In her closing remarks this week Ambassador Connelly noted that her opinion, “the bombing of the US Embassy taught us the stakes of involvement in this region,”

Has it, and we contemplate a “neutral peacekeeping presence” in Syria.

When will we ever learn.

French court strikes down Georges Abdallah’s release

Al-Akhbar

France’s highest appeals court has struck down a decision to release Georges Abdallah, 62, jailed in French prisons for 29 years, calling the Lebanese prisoner’s request for parole “irreceivable” on legal grounds.

He was granted parole on 21 November 2012, but the prosecution appealed the decision, and France has come under mounting pressure from the US and Israel to block his release.

“We don’t think he should be released and we are continuing our consultations with the French government about it,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters in January. “We have serious concerns that he could return to the battlefield.”

France’s interior minister Manuel Valls refused to sign Abdallah’s extradition order on the morning of his anticipated release in January, prompting protests and sit-ins at French centers across Lebanon.

Abdallah was sentenced to twenty years to life over his alleged involvement in the murder of two diplomats, an assistant to an American military and an Israeli in 1982. The court was not able to present concrete evidence against him, and he was imprisoned for passport fraud.

France’s court of cassation, its highest court of appeals, ruled against his release on grounds that Abdallah’s extradition would not allow for a one-year, electronically monitored parole period, compulsory for life-sentence convicts appealing for parole. His deportation from the country was ruled a necessary condition for his release.

The document detailing the court’s deliberations and ruling made no reference to the crime in question as justification for his continued imprisonment.

But Lebanese activists say there is still hope, and are holding out for an April 11 hearing at the Sentence Enforcement Tribunal (TAP), where they hope to challenge the appeal. It is unclear whether Thursday’s ruling can be contested, however.

“A case like this cannot be appealed based on the courts and France’s legal sources,” the prisoner’s brother, Joseph Abdallah, told Al-Akhbar.

Dozens of activists have gathered outside the French embassy to protest Thursday’s ruling, continuing months of regular demonstrations and sit-ins demanding Abdallah’s release.

Australian Mossad agent eliminated?

Press TV

Nearly six weeks after the Israeli regime confirmed that an Australian-Israeli Mossad agent had committed suicide in one of its maximum security prisons, it is still unclear whether his death was murder or suicide.

According to press reports in Australia and Europe, the agent, Ben Zygier, also known as Prisoner X, was originally dispatched to Europe in 2005 by his Mossad handlers with a mission to infiltrate companies that did business with Iran in an effort to be assigned to the country under a commercial cover.

Although he succeeded in getting hired by a midsize European company, Zygier failed in his mission to penetrate Iran and was ordered to return to Israel.

Zygier, described as “an enthusiastic Zionist who grew up in a prominent Jewish family in Melbourne and immigrated to Israel as a young man,” then won Mossad’s approval to return to his native Australia under the alias Ben Alon to continue his college studies.

The reports further emphasize that following his February 2008 return to Australia, he attempted to approach members of Lebanon’s Hezbollah movement at University of Melbourne in an unauthorized, freelance effort to recruit them for Mossad.

In an apparent bid to gain the trust of a key Hezbollah agent in Eastern Europe, the reports say, Zygier “unintentionally” exposed two important Mossad elements in Lebanon, leading to their arrest and imprisonment.

These press reports have further revealed that Zygier believed that he had recruited the Hezbollah agent to work for Mossad, but it was indeed the Hezbollah man that played a double game with him, relaying all the information furnished by Zygier back to Hezbollah leadership in Lebanon.

As a result, the two Mossad elements, Ziad al-Homsi and Mustafa Ali Awadeh, were arrested in Lebanon in May 2009 and sentenced to long prison terms.

According to the British daily Independent, Zygier’s leaking of Mossad secrets was regarded as the biggest “treason” by the notorious spy agency, eventually leading to his recall to Israel in February 2010 and immediate arrest and imprisonment in a maximum security facility.

It appears, however, that Zygier was killed in the Israeli prison since Mossad was convinced, and enraged, that he was feeding information to Hezbollah elements.

This is while the entire maximum security prison, except the toilets in solitary cells, is under a 24-hour video monitoring.

The Israeli regime claimed two months ago that Zygier had used a bed sheet to hang himself inside his cell’s toilet.

US-”Israeli” wishes fulfilled in Bahrain: Hizbullah “terrorist”

Moqawama

US- “Israeli” pressures to blacklist Hizbullah culminated but not in Europe.

However, they found their way into the Gulf Bahraini Kingdom.

Al-Khalifa’s dynasties unfair moved from the crackdown against civilians into blacklisting a Lebanese resistance group.

In details, the Bahrain’s parliament approved on Tuesday in an unprecedented step an urgent proposal to label Hizbullah a terrorist organization. It further called on the cabinet to coordinate with the country’s Foreign Ministry and with its counterparts in the Gulf Cooperation Council’s nations to put the suggestion in force.

The proposal was referred to the cabinet after it succeeded in receiving a majority vote at the parliament.

“I demand the FM to collaborate with the GCC countries to crush Hizbullah,” – legislator Jassim al-Saeedi stated at the parliament.

Meanwhile, MP Khaled Abdul Aal told CNN television that al-Saeedi’s proposal has a “sectarian basis”, despite the group is a resistance against “Israel”.

“His proposal is worthless…Only the king has the authority to adopt such steps,” he added.
Similarly, former lawmaker Jassem Murad stated that the proposal was “a wrong decision”, noting that he does not think the cabinet will adopt it.

“The kingdom does not need to immerse itself in such issues,” he clarified, noting that such a decision might have negative consequences on Bahrain and its people.

Murad said the vote might have been a result of the withdrawal of al-Wefaq bloc from the parliament.

Sayyed Nasrallah refutes rumors, stresses: “We won’t be dragged into sedition”

by Marwa Haidar, Al Manar

As his eminence appeared Wednesday on al-Manar TV to refute rumors over his health condition, Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah warned that there have been sides who seek sectarian sedition in Lebanon.

Sayyed Nasrallah said that there are clerics among the Sunni sect, who have been adopting an escalating rhetoric, wondering if “their incitement is based on realities or illusions.”

His eminence also tackled the electoral law, calling for discussing the proposal of a law based on single district with proportional representation.

Hezbollah S.G. said that there is an armed campaign aimed to displace people who live in villages located near the Syrian border, stressing that these people have been defending themselves.

Sayyed Nasrallah also urged the government to convene in order to discuss the ranks and salaries system and to settle this issue.

“SOME SEEK SECTARIAN SEDITION AMONG MUSLIMS”

Sayyed Nasrallah warned that some people have been seeking sectarian sedition.

“There are sides that are driving sectarian strife, especially between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, in an accelerated manner,” Sayyed Nasralla addressed his people on al-Manar TV.
“There are MPs and clerics among the Sunni sect who have been adopting an escalating rhetoric,” his eminence said, wondering: “this incitement is based on realities or illusions?”

“If it’s based on realities let us sit together and talk about the issue in order to solve the problem. But if it is based on illusions, let us know who has been seeking sedition in our country.”

Sayyed Nasrallah also stressed that “we must not sit and simply watch who are seeking strife, and this needs wise people who intervene in a bid to reconcile between the sides who are at odds.”
“I say to those who simply watch any dispute that the strife is not in favor of any side in this country.”

“WRONG CALCULATIONS”

On the issue of Sidon and the threats made by Imam of Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque Sheikh Ahmad Assir, Sayyed Nasrallah warned against “wrong calculations”, but stressed that Hezbollah “won’t be dragged into sedition.”

Asking whether the residing in Sidon needs permission from one side or another, Syyed Nasrallah said: “we were engaged in Sidon’s liberation… and after the Israeli withdrawal from the city we have apartments, houses, mosques and complexes there since 20 or 25 years.”

“We didn’t have an office near a Mosque, however this mosque was built near the office,” Sayyed Nasrallah said referring to Bilal Bin Rabah Mosque, but without naming Assir.

Assir threatened last week that a Hezbollah office near his mosque should be evacuated by Hezbollah members. However Sayyed Nsrallah stressed that this office was established even before Bilal Bin Rabah Moasque was built.

“ORTHODOX PROPOSAL OR SINGLE DISTRICT WITH PROPRTIONAL SYSTEM”

Speaking about the electoral law, Sayyed Nasrallah called to seriously discuss the law of single district with proportional representation.

His eminence said that this proposal is the most appropriate electoral law since it goes beyond the negative points of the Orthodox Gathering proposal.

He also said that “there are foreign and local powers that have been driving for delaying the elections.”

Responding to claims that Hezbollah favors postponing elections, Sayyed Nasrallah stressed “it’s of Hezbollah’s interest to hold the elections on time.”

However, he said that some sides prefer to delay the elections, as they bet on the fall of the Syrian regime.

“Who wants to delay the elections, let him announce his intention and causes without accusing others of being interested in the delay.”

ARMED CAMPAIGN AGAINST LEBANESE BORDER VILLAGES

Sayyed Nasrallah indicated there has been an armed campaign against some Lebanese villages on the Syrian border.

“These campaigns are aimed at displacing the people of these villages. These people hold weapons to defend themselves, and their land.”

In this context, Hezbollah S.G. said “it is their right to defend themselves,” but stressed that they should not attack any one.

“Syrian armed opposition has occupied some Shiite villages in Syria, as it displaced its people whose some of them are now seeking shelter in the region of Bekaa and Hermel.”

ISSUES OF RANKS AND SALARIES, KIDNAPPING

On the other hand, Sayyed Nasrallah urged the government to settle ranks and salaries system, calling for a quick and exceptional session in which this issue will be approved and then to refer it to the Parliament.

Meanwhile, his eminence tackled the kidnapping which Lebanon has been witnessing since weeks ago, considering this issue a dangerous one.

He called for a national cooperation to confront this phenomenon, stressing that the state, security body and the judicial authority should hold their responsibilities regarding this problem.

“Israel” instructs Obama: “Iranian and Syrian sanctions are not painful enough!”

…impose an international blockade now!

by Franklin Lamb, Al Manar

Beirut

On 3/26/2013 Iran is expected to meet other world powers in Astana, Kazakhstan to discuss its nuclear program. Discussions that the occupiers of Palestine fervently hope will not be successful. It is toward this end that their key demand this week to the US Congress, the White House and the European Union is “to cast responsibility on the Iranians by blaming them for the talks’ failure in the clearest terms possible.”

According to the Al-Monitor of 3/19/13, Israel also demands that the countries meeting in Kazakhstan “make it perfectly clear that slogans such as ‘negotiations can’t go on forever’ are their marching orders to the White House, and they want the Kazakhstan attendees to act “so severely that the Iranians realize that they face a greater threat than just Israeli military action.” “The message must be that this time the entire west, behind Israel’s leadership, is contemplating the launch of a massive military action.” Unsaid is that “the entire West” is expected to confront Iran militarily while Tel Aviv’s forces will mop up Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Syria if necessary.

Pending the above arrangements, Israel this week is further demanding that the Obama White House issue another Executive Order dramatically ratcheting up the US-led Sanctions against Iran and Syria while it prepares for a hoped for “ game changing international economic blockade, including no-fly zones enforced by NATO.

To achieve yet another lawyer of severe sanctions, and at the behest of AIPAC, a “legislative planning” meeting was called by Congressman Eliot Engel, who represents New Yorks 17th District (the Bronx) and who is the Ranking Member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Rep. Ros-Lehtinen (Florida’s 27th District), Chair of the House Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa. The session was held in a posh Georgetown restaurant and participant’s included representatives from AIPAC, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain plus half a dozen Congressional staffers.

Congressman Engel has co-sponsored virtually every anti-Arab, anti-Islam, anti-Palestinian, anti-Iran, and anti-Syrian Congressional broadside since he entered Congress a quarter-century ago. His campaign literature last fall stated: “I am a strong supporter of sanctions against those who repeatedly reject calls to behave as responsible nations. (Israel excepted-ed). I have authored or helped author numerous bills which have been signed into law to impose sanctions against rogue states including Iran and Syria.” Ros-Lehtinen and Engel led all members with AIPAC donations on the House side in last fall’s Congressional elections. They are ranked number one and two respectively as still serving career recipients of Israel-AIPAC’s “indirect” campaign donations.

Some Congressional operatives accuse Rep. Ros-Lehtinen of being a bit lazy and neglecting the bread and butter needs of her Florida constituents. But others argue that it depends on which constituents one has in mind. Her election mailings and her Congressional website claim that the Congresswoman “led all Congressional efforts tirelessly to generate votes to block what she views as anti-Israel resolutions offered at the former UN Commission on Human Rights.”

A big fan of US-led sanctions against Iran and Syria, Rep. Ros-Lehtinen introduced the Iran Freedom Support Act on January 6, 2005, which increased sanctions and expanded punitive measures against the Iranian people until the Iranian regime has dismantled its nuclear plants. Rep. Ros-Lehtinen also introduced H.R. 957, the Iran Sanctions Amendments Act, which she claims “will close loopholes in current law by holding export credit agencies, insurers, and other financial institutions accountable for their facilitation of investments in Iran and sanction them as well.” In addition, H.R. 957 seeks to impose liability on parent companies for violations of sanctions by their foreign entities. She also co-sponsored H.R 1357 which requires “U.S. government pension funds to divest from companies that do any business with any country that does business with Iran.” Her campaign literature states that, “She was proud to be the leading Republican sponsor of H.R. 1400, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act. This bill applies and enhances a wide range of additional sanctions.”

In addition, last year Illeana introduced H.R. 394, which enlarges US Federal Court Jurisdiction regarding claims by American citizens their claims in U.S. courts. Unclear is whether she realizes that one consequence of her initiative would be to open even wider US courtroom doors to Iranian-Americans and Syria-Americans who today are being targeted and damaged by the lady’s ravenous insatiable craving for civilian targeting economic sanctions.
But Ileana and Elliot appear to be fretting.
So is Israel.

The reasons are several and they include the fact that the US-led sanctions have failed to date to achieve the accomplishments they were designed to produce. These being to cripple the Iranian economy, provoke a popular protest among the Iranian people over inflation and scarcity of food and medicines, weaken Iran as much as possible before adopting military measures against it, and, most essentially, achieving regime change to turn the clock back to those comfortable days of our submissive, compliant Shah.

Zionist prospects for Syria aren’t any better at the moment. Tel Aviv’s to intimidate the White House into invading Syria have not worked. Plan A has failed miserably according to the Israeli embassy people attending the Engel-Ros Litinen’s informal conflab. Neither did the “how about we just arm the opposition” plan that originated last year with David H. Petraeus and was supported by Hillary Clinton while being pushed by AIPAC. The goal was to create allies in Syria that the US and Israel could control if Mr. Assad was removed from power. Moreover, the White House believes that there are no good options for Obama. It has vetoed 4 recent Israeli proposals including arming the rebels and is said to believe that Syria is already dangerously awash with “unreliable arms.”

The recent shriveling in Israeli prospects for a dramatic Pentagon intervention in Syria reflect White House war weariness. And also Israel’s predilection to bomb targets itself in Syria, as it did recently to assassinate a senior Iranian officer in the Quds force of the Revolutionary Guards, Gen. Hassan Shateri. Contrary to the false story that Israel attacked a missiles convoy, some unassembled equipment was damaged but that was not the primary target according to Fred Hof, a former U.S. State Department official. Gen. Shateri was.

Making matters worse for Tel Aviv, the Israeli military is reportedly becoming skittish due to its deteriorating political and military status in the region and its troops have recently completed subterranean warfare drills to prepare them for a potential clash with Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, the Jerusalem Post reported on 2/20/13. “Today during training, we simulated a northern terrain, that included what we might encounter,” Israeli Lt. Sagiv Shoker, commander of a military Reconnaissance Unit of the Engineering Corps, based at the Elikim base in northern Israel near the border with Lebanon explained. Shoker added that his units spent a week focused on how to approach Hezbollah’s alleged underground bunkers and tunnels in South Lebanon and the Bekaa Valley quietly and quickly. Israeli forces commander Gantz has been complaining recently to the Israeli cabinet that Hezbollah Special Forces are gaining much valuable experience in Syria fighting highly skilled and motivated al Nusra jihadists and his troops may not be prepared to face them on the battlefield if a conflict erupts. It has been known since 2006 that Israeli soldiers “are having motivation deficits” as Gantz and others have complained.

Bulgarian revelations explode Hezbollah bombing “hypothesis”

by Gareth Porter, source

IPS — When European Union foreign ministers discuss a proposal to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation, Bulgaria’s Foreign Minister Nikolay Mladenov will present his government’s case for linking two suspects in the Jul. 18, 2012 bombing of an Israeli tourist bus to Hezbollah.

But European ministers who demand hard evidence of Hezbollah involvement are not likely to find it in the Bulgarian report on the investigation, which has produced no more than an “assumption” or “hypothesis” of Hezbollah complicity.

Major revelations about the investigation by the former head of the probe and by a top Bulgarian journalist have further damaged the credibility of the Bulgarian claim to have found links between the suspects and Hezbollah.

The chief prosecutor in charge of the Bulgarian investigation revealed in an interview published in early January that the evidence available was too scarce to name any party as responsible, and that investigators had found a key piece of evidence that appeared to contradict it.

An article in a Bulgarian weekly in mid-January confirmed that the investigation had turned up no information on a Hezbollah role, and further reported that one of the suspects had been linked by a friendly intelligence service to Al-Qaeda.

The statement made February 5 by Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov referred to what he called a “reasonable assumption” or as a “well-founded assumption”, depending on the translation, that two suspects in the case belonged to Hezbollah’s “military formation”.

Underlining the extremely tentative nature of the finding, Tsvetanov used the passive voice and repeated the carefully chosen formulation for emphasis: “A reasonable assumption, I repeat a reasonable assumption, can be made that the two of them were members of the militant wing of Hezbollah.”

The host of a Bulgarian television talk show asked Tsvetanov February 9 why the conclusion about Hezbollah had been presented as “only a guess”. But instead of refuting that description, Tsvetanov chose to call the tentative judgment a “grounded hypothesis for the complicity of the Hezbollah military wing”.

The reason why the senior official responsible for Bulgarian security used such cautious language became clear from an interview given by the chief prosecutor for the case, Stanella Karadzhova, who was in charge of the investigation, published by “24 Hours” newspaper January 3.

Karadzhova revealed how little was known about the two men who investigators believe helped the foreigner killed by the bomb he was carrying, but whom Tsvetanov would later link to Hezbollah. The reason, she explained, is that they had apparently traveled without cell phones or laptops.

Only two kinds of information appear to have linked the two, according to the Karadzhova interview, neither of which provides insight into their political affiliation. One was that both of them had led a “very ordered and simple” lifestyle, which she suggested could mean that they both had similar training.

The other was that both had fake Michigan driver’s licenses that had come from the same country. It was reported subsequently that the printer used to make the fake Michigan driver’s licenses had been traced to Beirut.

Those fragments of information were evidently the sole basis for the “hypothesis” that that two of the suspects were members of Hezbollah’s military wing. That hypothesis depended on logical leaps from the information. Any jihadist organisation could have obtained fake licenses from the Beirut factory, and a simple lifestyle does not equal Hezbollah military training.

But Karadzhova’s biggest revelation was that investigators had found a SIM card at the scene of the bombing and had hoped it would provide data on the suspect’s contacts before they had arrived at the scene of the bombing. But the telecom company in question was Maroc Telecom, and the Moroccan firm had not responded to requests for that information.

That provenance of the SIM Card is damaging to the Hezbollah “hypothesis”, because Maroc Telecom sells its cards throughout North Africa – a region in which Hezbollah is not known to have any operational bases but where Al-Qaeda has a number of large organisations.

Morocco is also considered a “staunch ally” of the United States, so it is unlikely that the Moroccan government would have refused a request from the United States to get the necessary cooperation from Moroccan Telecom.

Senior Bulgarian officials have remained mum about the SIM Card, and Karadzhova was sacked as chief prosecutor shortly after the interview was published, ostensibly because the interview had not been approved.

On January 17, the sister publication of “24 hours”, the weekly “168 Hours”, published an article by its editor, Slavi Angelov, reporting that the Bulgarian investigators had failed to find any evidence of Hezbollah involvement.

Angelov, one of the country’s premier investigative journalists, also wrote that one of the two suspects whose fake IDs were traced to Beirut had been linked by a “closely allied intelligence service” to a wing of Al-Qaeda.

The story, which is not available on the internet but was summarised on the “24 Hours” website, earned a brief reference in a January 17 story in the “Jerusalem Post”. That story referred to Angelov’s sources for the information about the Al-Qaeda link as unnamed officials in the Interior Ministry.

The Angelov story’s revelation that Bulgaria had no evidence linking Hezbollah to the bus bombing was also headlined by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on the same day.

By the time the investigation’s four-month extension was due to expire on January18, there was no question among investigators that they needed much more time to reach any meaningful judgment on who was responsible for the bombing. Chief prosecutor Karadzhova told “24 Hours” there was “no obstacle to the deadline being extended repeatedly”.

But by mid-January, international politics posed such an obstacle: the United States and Israel were already pointing to the February 18 meeting of EU foreign ministers as an opportunity to get action by the EU on listing Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation. Washington and Tel Aviv wanted a conclusion from the Bulgarians that could be used at that meeting to force the issue.

A meeting of Bulgaria’s Consultative Council for National Security to consider extending the investigation, originally scheduled for January 17, was suddenly postponed.

Instead, on that date Foreign Minister Mladenov was sent on an unannounced visit to Israel. Israel’s Channel 2 reported after the meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his National Security Advisor Yaakov Amidror that Bulgaria had given Israel a report blaming Hezbollah for the bus bombing.

The office of the Bulgarian foreign minister and Prime Minister Boyko Borissov both issued denials Jan. 18. Borissov said there would be no comment on the investigation until “indisputable evidence has been discovered”, implying that it did not have the needed evidence yet.

Nevertheless, over the next three weeks, the Bulgarian government had to negotiate the wording of what it would say about the conclusion of its investigation.

The decision to call the conclusion an “assumption” or even the weaker “hypothesis” about Hezbollah was obviously a compromise between the preference of the investigators themselves and the demands of the United States and Israel.

The timing of that decision is a sensitive issue in Bulgaria. Prime Minister Borissov told reporters in Brussels February 7 that he had decided to “name Hezbollah” after investigators had found the SIM card at the site of the bombing. That would put the decision well before Karadzhova gave her interview January 1.

And in any case, the discovery of the SIM card could not have caused the investigators to veer toward Hezbollah but would have called that hypothesis into question.

Tsvetanov admitted that the Hezbollah “assumption” had been adopted only “after the middle of January”. That admission indicates that the decision was reached under pressure from Washington, not because of any new evidence.

Birds of prey: The record of impunity for Israeli military aircraft

(Lebanon-Palestine border, Israeli troops, file photo)

by Brenda Heard, Friends of Lebanon

Since March 1978, for thirty-five years, the United Nations Interim Forces in Lebanon, UNIFIL, has been monitoring the conflict between Israel and Lebanon— the tension, the daring, the mayhem, the killing.  The enthusiastic efforts UNIFIL made in the early years soon waned.  Perhaps it was the politics, perhaps it was the frustration of an ineffectual mandate, or perhaps it was losing 279 troops to-date.    Whatever the cause, public statements from UNIFIL seem to have settled into a laissez-faire yawn.

For instance, when the Head of Mission, Major-General Serra, recently held a regular tripartite meeting with senior officers from the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Israel Defence Forces, he stated (23 January 2013) that he “was pleased to see the positive engagement of both the parties on all the issues.”   It had been a “generally quiet period in the area of operations,” he said, “with both parties maintaining a strong commitment to the cessation of hostilities.”

Yet exactly one week later, Israeli military executed a bombing mission at the Lebanese-Syrian border.  Warplanes bombarded a scientific research centre in Jamraya, injuring five employees and killing two.  It seems Major-General Serra’s portrayal of Israel having a “strong commitment to the cessation of hostilities,” perhaps offered to be politically correct at the time, was rather off the mark.

The New York Times immediately reported that Israel had carried out a pre-emptive strike targeting an alleged arms convoy headed for Lebanese Hezbollah.  The next day, Ambassador Ja’afari, Syrian Permanent Representative to the UN, made a formal statement to the UN General Assembly and Security Council (A/67/721—S/2013/70).  He confirmed the deadly hit on the research centre—which had been unsuccessfully targeted over a period of months by armed insurgents.  But he flatly denied reports of the arms convoy.

Regardless of what was actually bombed, the incentive to attack was clarified by Israeli Defence Minister Barak at the Munich Security Conference four days later.  Barak stated that the bombing was “another proof that when we say something we mean it” and that “We say that we don’t think that it should be allowed to bring advanced weapon systems into Lebanon, the Hezbollah, from Syria, when Assad falls.”  In fact he repeatedly asserted that the defeat of President Assad would be a “major blow” to both Iran and Hezbollah, that they would both “pay the price.”  Like all statements emanating from the Israeli government, Barak’s stance was imbued with a sense of entitlement to judge his neighbours, to whom he was overtly hostile.

Former US intelligence official Matthew Levitt, currently an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, offered a forthright assessment: “Israel is able to fly reconnaissance flights over Lebanon with impunity right now,” he said.  The potential of Hezbollah’s having anti-aircraft weapons, he explained, was a “real concern” as it “could cut into its [Israel’s] ability to conduct aerial intelligence.”

Impunity is the key term here, because such conduct is illegal.  Israel’s routine overflights—characterised by UNIFIL in 2009 as not only a “humiliation to the Lebanese government and UNIFIL,” but also an “act of war,” —have been acknowledged by all parties to have been a problem since August 2000.  Nonetheless, Israel has consistently invoked its quest for security, which is held to supersede not only the security of all others, but also the dictates of international law.  On 14 November 2012, for instance, the UN Security Council reported:

“The Israel Defense Forces continued to make almost daily intrusions into Lebanese airspace.  During the reporting period, in addition to the significant number of unmanned aerial vehicles overflying Lebanese territory, UNIFIL observed several air exercises, including formations of multiple fighter jets.  These overflights are violations of resolution 1701 (2006), as well as of Lebanese sovereignty. UNIFIL has continued to protest all air violations, calling on the Israeli authorities to cease them immediately.  The Government of Lebanon also protested the violations, while the Government of Israel continued to maintain that the overflights are a necessary security measure.”  (S/2012/837 reporting period from 29 June to 30 October 2012)

The habitual overflights violate not just Resolution 1701, but dozens of Resolutions dating back to1968 warning Israel to respect the sovereignty of Lebanon.   The issue was most famously spelled out with UN Resolution 425 (1978), recalled in all subsequent Resolutions, which

“Calls for strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally recognized boundaries; Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory.” (S/RES/425 (1978), 19 March 1978)

In addition to the numerous bombing missions over the years, though, the Israeli birds of prey have been relentless in their mock raids and reconnaissance.  The government of Lebanon has dutifully complained to the United Nations.  For example in the last year (originals listed here):

• January 2013 A/67/718–S/2013/68 (47 air violations in December 2012)
• December 2012 (A/67/685–S/2012/945) (46 air violations in November 2012)
• December 2012 (A/67/620–S/2012/911) (57 air violations in October 2012)
• November 2012 (A/67/536–S/2012/809) (50 air violations in September 2012)
• September 2012 (A/67/397–S/2012/723) (95 air violations in August 2012)
• September 2012 (A/66/898–S/2012/691) (82 air violations in July 2012)
• August 2012 (A/66/876–S/2012/6010 (82 air violations in June 2012)
• July 2012 (A/66/863–S/2012/557) (100 air violations in May 2012)
• May 2012 (A/66/817–S/2012/375) (113 air violations in April 2012)
• May 2012 (A/66/780–S/2012/262) (77 air violations in March 2012)
• April 2012 (A/66/771S/2012/174) (71 air violations in February 2012)
• March 2012 (A/66/744—S/2012/156) (64 air violations in January 2012)
• March 2012 (A/66/725–S/2012/123) (notes 9,611 land/sea/air violations since Resolution 1701)

Every single month Israeli military aircraft have made repeated circles up to and including Beirut.  Yet UNIFIL’s assessment last month was nearly verbatim from six previous tripartite meetings: November 2012, October 2012, August 2012, July 2012, May 2012, March 2012.  Somehow, hundreds of violations were swept under the rug as “discussed.”  Somehow, continual violations translated to “full support and commitment” to implement Resolution 1701.  Not a mention of the drones or the “formations of multiple fighter jets” by which Israel blatantly transgressed Lebanese territorial sovereignty.

It has been argued that Israel should not be bound by Resolution 1701 because Hezbollah, as the primary resistance force in Lebanon, has remained armed.  Firstly, UN Resolutions do not subscribe to the all-or-none approach; they specify obligations to each party separately.  Secondly, prior to the formation of Hezbollah Resistance there were already 28 UN Security Council Resolutions condemning Israel’s aggressions against Lebanon.[1] Thirdly, Resolution 1701 states that prohibitions on weaponry “shall not apply to arms, related material, training or assistance authorized by the Government of Lebanon or by UNIFIL.”  And the noted “consent of the Government of Lebanon” is indeed expressed in the 2011 Ministerial Statement of Prime Minister Najib Mikati’s Cabinet:

“The government is committed to work on ending Israeli occupation to remaining Lebanese occupied territories; in addition to ending Israeli aggressive practices and spying operations that violates Lebanon’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.  The government adheres to the right of Lebanon through its people, army and Resistance to liberate and retrieve the Shebaa Farms, Kfar Shouba Hills and the Lebanese part of the Ghajar Village, as well as to defend Lebanon in confronting any aggression through all legitimate and accessible means and to hold on to its right to use its water and oil resources and to consolidate its maritime borders.”

No one, not even Israel, denies that these egregious violations take place on a regular basis.  But there is always an excuse: Israel and its enablers insist that the violations are merely a necessary security measure.   Israeli Defence Minister Barak was quick to blame the Jamraya airstrike on the stubborn Syrian/Lebanese resistance; “we don’t think that it should be allowed,” he said.

Predictably, both the US and the UK quietly supported the airstrike.  The American response was a shrug of the shoulders and a warning—not to Israel, of course—but to Syria and Hezbollah.  The British responded likewise, avoiding any hint of impropriety from Israel, while frowning squarely at Syria and Hezbollah.

As for the overflights, the UK loosely urges “both countries to fulfil all their obligations under UNSCR 1701 and to avoid any provocative actions.”  But when asked whether they were “making representations to the Government of Israel about reports of Israeli aircraft staging mock air raids over southern Lebanon,” the British stance was clarified:

“While our officials in Israel are aware of these reports, our lobbying of the Israeli Government focuses on the most urgent issues including those that pose the greatest threat to the Middle East peace process or to the lives of ordinary citizens in the region.  This specific issue has not been raised with the Israeli authorities.  An absence of hostilities between Israel and Lebanon remains a priority for the UK and our international partners.  We are monitoring developments closely.” (11 June 2012)

Behind the scenes, though, is the darker side of politics.  As a cable from the US Embassy in Beirut reveals, for example, in November 2006 then-UN Special Adviser on the Situation in the Middle East Michael Williams “expressed pleasant surprise by the willingness of the Israelis to talk about the issue” of overflights.  He and fellow UN officials “were most encouraged by their talks with Israeli military intelligence, where they reportedly heard that overflights could cease if the USG [United States Government] would provide needed intelligence through other channels.”  Williams expressed hope that the US and Israel would be able to “develop arrangements through which Israeli overflights of Lebanese territory would cease.”

During his February 2007 visit to Israel, Williams discussed Resolution 1701 with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and staff.  As a cable from the US Embassy in Tel Aviv reveals, the UN has not always backed UNIFIL.  According to both the Ministry and UN staff,

“Williams surprised his hosts by expressing ‘understanding’ for the reasons behind Israel’s continued overflights of southern Lebanon.  UN staff said he thanked the GOI [Government of Israel] for decreasing the number of flights and ending provocative operations that UNIFIL interpreted as mock bombing runs against international units and facilities.  At the same time, he stressed to the GOI that all overflights are violations of UNSCR 1701 and cautioned that he would have to say so in public if asked.”

A year and a half later, Williams was appointed the UN Special Coordinator for Lebanon.

Similarly, in October 2006, as a cable from the American Embassy in Paris reveals, the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs was “consulting closely with French intelligence services on ways to share more intelligence with Israel to obviate the need for overflights.”  The French encouraged the Israelis to be more discreet.  They “privately assured Israel” that UNIFIL’s Force Commander Major General Alain Pellegrini—as he had spoken of a possible expansion of UNIFIL’s rules of engagement to prevent overflights— “would soon be reassigned.”   He left the post in February 2007.

The Lebanese National News Agency has reported at least 31 breeches of airspace so far in February.  Yet the international community has turned a blind eye toward Israel’s contempt for international law.  UNIFIL, with its average annual budget of over $500 million (A/C.5/66/SR.31), files the same protests it has filed for decades and seems uninterested in challenging Israel directly—at least not publicly.  Israel has continued undaunted in its military occupation of regional skies.  Such rogue conduct has developed through years and years of pushing the boundaries, through a pattern of aggression and impunity.

[1] 262 (1968); 270 (1969); 279, 280, 285 (1970); 313, 316, 317 (1972); 332, 337 (1973); 347 (1974); 425, 427, 434, 436 (1978); 444, 450, 459 (1979); 467, 474, 483 (1980); 488, 490, 498 (1981); 501, 508, 509, 512 (1982).

Brenda Heard is founder and director of Friends of Lebanon, London. The article was contributed to the Silver Lining blog. 

Hezbollah fully equipped, won’t tolerate Israeli attack

by Batoul Wehbe, Al Manar (video)

Hezbollah Secretary General Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah said the resistance in Lebanon is fully equipped and will not tolerate any attack that might take place against Lebanon.

In a televised speech during a ceremony in commemoration of Hezbollah’s martyred leaders, Sayyed Nasrallah warned the Zionist entity and its allies that the Islamic resistance in Lebanon will not tolerate any attack against the Lebanese territory, assuring that Hezbollah is fully-equipped “and everything we need is found in Lebanon, we don’t need to transfer it neither from Syria, nor Iran.”

His eminence considered that the Israeli knows that all we are saying is serious and therefore is mobilizing all its capabilities, and pointed out that when the Israeli enemy wants to attack Lebanon, it does not look for any excuse but invents one.

“30 years on, the Resistance project stands on a solid ground of equations, achievements and victories, not just dreams ought to be true. For 30 years the resistance was one of the strongest realities that changed regional strategies,” Sayyed Nasrallah said.

In the school of martyred leaders, Sayyed Nasrallah said, the priority was the resistance because the correct diagnosis of the biggest risk points to the Israeli enemy and the Zionist project. “When we think deeply on Islamic and national levels we find that the most danger threatening the nation is “Israel”, and the only logic choice is the popular resistance.”

The S.G. said Martyr Sheikh Ragheb Harb was a witness to the establishment of the resistance, leadership and decisive options, Sayyed Abbas Mousawi witnessed the stage of stability, focus and consistency in the resistance, and the martyr leader Hajj Imad Mughniyeh was a witness on the stage of quantitative and qualitative evolution as well as the stage of achievements and victories. “We chose this year’s logo ‘On the Road to Palestine’ because the forgotten Palestinian cause is our main cause and our martyrs had fallen on the road to Palestine.”

Sayyed Nasrallah swore by the blood of the martyred leaders that their sons, companions and students are stronger in their resistance and warned the Israeli enemy that the previous revenge, he pledged after the martyrdom of Moghnieh, ‘is still open.’

Concerning Al-Mustaqbal Party leader MP Saad Hariri’s speech during the commemoration of his late father PM Rafik Hariri’s assassination, Sayyed Nasrallah said that reducing the number of Shiite ministers was aimed at giving a chance to a reputable historical family in Lebanon, the Karami family, to take part in the political life and wasn’t a bribe as the MP had claimed.

“We reject neutralizing Hezbollah’s weapons and the abolition of the International Tribunal, in return of putting the country under the control of a specific person, this is bribery. We do not want to maintain the arms rather we want to maintain the resistance, and if the weapons of the resistance weren’t to confront Israel and defend Lebanon it wouldn’t be worth the sacrifice,” his eminence said.

Sayyed Nasrallah said Saad Hariri’s speech is an insult to his father’s history. “In the past, we met you martyred father and discussed about the resistance and its weapons, and we have already told him that our priority is the resistance and everything other than it is debatable. He told us: I am with you and I’m with the keeping of the resistance and its weapons until peace is established.” “Did your father take a bribery from us?” the S.G wondered.

Sayyed Nasrallah told Hariri that through the Turkish-Qatari initiative “you offered us to keep our arms in return for backing you for premiership ad we didn’t accept you to be the PM out of national interests. We want a Lebanese PM, a premier who resides in Lebanon!”

“When we deal with (Prime Minister Najib) Miqati’s government, we are sure that it will not stab the resistance in its back. Miqati and his cabinet will remain faithful to the resistance,” his eminence indicated.

On relations with PSP leader MP Walid Jumblatt, Sayyed Nasrallah said Jumblatt “has a clear stance towards the resistance but we are divided on the Syrian crisis, and we will not encourage tension in the country because of our different views on this topic.” He added that the “split over the situation in Syria doesn’t mean that we want the turmoil to spill over into Lebanon.”

Hezbollah’s secretary general Nasrallah hailed the Orthodox Gathering proposal, saying: “We are convinced that it achieves better representation even if we had a priority to make Lebanon one district based on proportional representation. We agreed on the Orthodox deaf-law and we will vote if it was proposed at the parliament.”

Concerning the Bulgarian accusation for Hezbollah as being behind Burgas airport attack where Five Israeli tourists and their Bulgarian driver were killed last year, Sayyed Nasrallah rejected the accusations as baseless.

“[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu immediately blamed Hezbollah of being behind the attack… But Israel doesn’t wage a war as a reaction,” H.E said in his speech. In this regard, Sayyed Nasrallah denounced some parts who believed this claim and based their measures on it, including Lebanese parts.

The S.G. offered condolences over the martyrdom of the head of the Iranian Committee for Reconstruction of Lebanon, engineer Hussam Khoshnevis while he was on his way to Lebanon from Syria.

He also saluted the Bahraini revolution, expressing hope that the national dialogue will achieve people’s aspirations.

Bulgarian charge of Hezbollah bombing was an “assumption”

by Gareth Porter, source

Bulgarian Interior Minister Tsvetan Tsvetanov’s dramatic announcement Tuesday on the Bulgarian investigation of the July 2012 terror bombing of an Israeli tourist bus was initially reported by Western news media as suggesting clear evidence of Hezbollah’s responsibility for the killings.

But more accurate reports on the minister’s statement and the only details he provided reveal that the alleged link between the bomb suspects and Hezbollah was merely an “assumption” rather than a conclusion based on specific evidence.

Tsvetanov was quoted by various Western news outlets as saying, “We have established that the two were members of the militant wing of Hezbollah.” The minister also said, “There is data showing the financing and connection between Hezbollah and the two suspects,” according to the BBC and Jerusalem Post.

Those statements implied that the Bulgarian investigators had uncovered direct evidence of Hezbollah’s involvement in the Burgas bombing.

But the New York Times on Wednesday quoted Tsvetanov as saying, in remarks to a session of Bulgaria’s Consultative Council on National Security Tuesday, “A reasonable assumption, I repeat a reasonable assumption, can be made that the two of them were members of the militant wing of Hezbollah.”

That statement appeared to acknowledge that he was merely speculating on the basis of data that doesn’t necessarily support that conclusion.

In a report on Wednesday by Sofia News Agency, Bulgaria’s largest English-language news provider, Tsvetanov was quoted as saying that the investigation had led to a “well-founded assumption” that two of the perpetrators of the deadly attack belonged to what the Bulgarian government is calling the “militant wing of Hezbollah”.

In an interview with Bulgarian National Radio Wednesday, the Bulgarian chief prosecutor, Sotir Tsatsarov, emphasised that the investigation of the Burgas bus bombing had not been concluded and expressed concern about the term “well-founded assumption”.

The chief prosecutor implied that Tsvetanov’s conclusion about Hezbollah might have been swayed by political pressures. Tsatsarov said that the prosecutor’s office “could not be used to make political decisions or to justify them”, according to Sofia News Agency.

In a television interview for the morning broadcast of Bulgarian National Television, Bulgarian Foreign Minister Nikolay Mladenov defended Tsvetanov’s use of the phrase “well-founded assumption”. Mladenov explained that it meant that Bulgaria had “good reason” to believe that the attack had been organised and inspired by members of the militant branch of Hezbollah at this stage of the investigation, Sofia News Agency reported.

But Mladenov did not claim that any of those “good reasons” consisted of hard evidence.

In an interview with Associated Press Tuesday, Europol Director Rob Wainright said, “The Bulgarian authorities are making quite a strong assumption that this is the work of Hezbollah.”

But Wainright also cited only the most general arguments in support of Tsvetanov’s “assumption”, declaring, “From what I’ve seen of the case – from the very strong, obvious links to Lebanon, from the modus operandi of the terrorist attack and from other intelligence that we see – I think that is a reasonable assumption.”

Europol had sent several investigators to help the Bulgarian authorities on the Burgas bombing investigation, Wainwright told Associated Press.

None of the details provided by Tsvetanov, according to press reports, involved evidence showing that two of the alleged conspirators belonged to Hezbollah or to Hezbollah financing of the terror plot.

The most important piece of evidence cited by Tsvetanov was the lengthy stays in Lebanon by two of the three alleged participants in the bombing and driver’s licenses that were forged in Lebanon.

Tsvetanov said the two alleged conspirators with Canadian and Australian passports who are believed to have helped the third member of the cell carry out the Burgas bombing lived in Lebanon between 2006 and 2010.

He also indicated that two of driver’s licenses used by the conspirators were “forged in Lebanon”, and that Bulgaria was able to piece together the movements of two of the suspects from Lebanon to Europe.

Those connections between the alleged conspirators and the bombing by themselves could hardly support an assumption of Hezbollah responsibility for the bombing. Al-Qaeda terrorist cells have been operating in Lebanon for years, and have the technical capability for such a bombing plot.

Members of one Al-Qaeda network of 13 men organised in different cells arrested in 2006 and 2007 confessed to having planned and carried out the 2005 assassination of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, although they retracted their confessions before trial.

Furthermore, Al-Qaeda has claimed responsibility for a series of terrorist bombings involving Israeli tourists in the past, whereas there is no known case of a Hezbollah bombing of Israeli tourists, as a Hezbollah spokesman pointed out Wednesday.

In November 2002, Al-Qaeda carried out a terrorist attack on Israeli tourists in Mombasa, Kenya in November 2002 that involved an attempted shoot-down of an Israeli passenger aircraft and a triple suicide car bombing of an Israeli-owned hotel.

Two years later, an Al-Qaeda affiliate took responsibility for bombings at three Red Sea resorts, killing 34 Israeli tourists. And in July 2005, the same Al-Qaeda-related organisation took responsibility for suicide bomb attacks that killed at least 88 people at a shopping area and hotel packed with tourists, including Israelis, in the Egyptian Red Sea resort city of Sharm el Sheik.

Nevertheless, Tsvetanov offered no other specific evidence to support his conclusion.

Another aspect of the Bulgarian investigation suggesting that information about the alleged participants is still very limited is the fact, reported by the Bulgarian daily newspaper Sega, that the investigators had found no direct communication and only “indirect indications” of ties between the Arab holding an Australian passport and the perpetrator of the attack.

The Bulgarian charge of Hezbollah responsibility for the bombing based on little more than assumption has raised the suspicion in Bulgaria that the government was under pressure from the United States and Israel to reach a conclusion that aligned with the Israeli-American position.

Foreign Minister Mladenov denied that Bulgaria was pressured into issuing a statement on the progress of the investigation. But both Israel and the United States have given evidence of wanting such a statement.

Bulgaria is a member of NATO and has expanded military and intelligence ties with Israel since Israeli relations with Turkey soured in 2009.

Israel also played a key role in the Bulgarian investigation, as Interior Minister Tsvetanov acknowledged in his presentation Tuesday. He specifically thanked the Israeli government for its support in regard to the investigation and said Israel had provided “relevant expertise” in regard to one of the indicators implicitly cited as pointing to Hezbollah – the identification of the false driver’s licenses used by the alleged bomb cell.

Ha’aretz reported Tuesday that Israel and the United States had both feared that, “while the investigation’s finding would be clear, Bulgaria’s public statement would be ambiguous and would not name Hezbollah responsible.”

John Brennan, U.S. President Barack Obama’s primary adviser on homeland security and counter-terrorism, issued a statement that portrayed the Bulgarian investigation as having reached a definitive conclusion. Brennan praised the Bulgarian authorities for “their determination and commitment to ensuring that Hizballah is held to account for this act of terror on European soil.”