Egypt frees Hezbollah members to Gaza ...

FLC

GAZA, May 1 (UPI) --" Two Palestinian members of a Hezbollah cell arrived in Gaza this weekend following their release by the Egyptian authorities.Mohammed Ramadan, 17, and Nidal Fathi Juda, 23, were arrested three years ago along with other cell members for terror activities..."

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 10:23 AM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The Syrian Time Bomb

Via MCS

- 28. Apr, 2011

Forget Libya. Washington should pay closer attention to the violent protests imperiling the Assad regime in Damascus. If there’s one country where unrest could truly set the Middle East alight, it’s Syria.

BY PATRICK SEALE / FP

While one war rages in Libya, another rages in Washington as to the necessity of U.S. action there. Indeed, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said as much this weekend, noting that Libya was not a “vital national interest.” But if Washington is looking for an Arab state in the throes of unrest, one that is key to its regional and national interests, planners might want to pay more attention to Syria, which is currently undergoing upheaval not seen since the early 1980s.

Syria lies at the center of a dense network of Middle East relationships, and the crisis in that country — which has now resulted in the deaths of well over 100 civilians, and possibly close to double that number — is likely to have a major impact on the regional structure of power. The need to contain pressure from the United States and Israel, for decades the all-consuming concern of Syria’s leadership, has suddenly been displaced by an explosion of popular protest highlighting urgent and long-neglected domestic issues.

If the regime fails to tame this domestic unrest, Syria’s external influence will inevitably be enfeebled, with dramatic repercussions across the Middle East. As the crisis deepens, Syria’s allies tremble. Meanwhile, its enemies rejoice, as a weakened Syria would remove an obstacle to their ambitions. But nature abhors a vacuum, and what will come will be unpredictable, at best.

The protests started in mid-March in Daraa, in southern Syria, a city that has suffered from drought and neglect by the government in Damascus. The heavy hand of the ruling Baath party was particularly resented. Because it lies on the border with Jordan, and therefore in a security zone, all land sales required the security services’ approval, a slow and often costly business. This is one of the particular grievances that have powered the protest movement, though certainly the ripples of the successful Egyptian and Tunisian uprisings played a hand. The government, to put it bluntly, responded poorly. Troops in Daraa fired live rounds against youthful demonstrators and virtually all communications — Internet and telephone — were shuttered to prevent the seepage of unrest.

To make matters worse, Damascus blamed Israeli provocateurs, rebel forces, and shady foreign agents for the bloodshed — anyone but its own forces. Civilian deaths at the hands of security forces there, and more recently in the coastal city of Latakia, have outraged opinion across the country, setting alight long pent-up anger at the denial of basic freedoms, the monopolistic rule of the Baath party, and the abuses of a privileged elite. To these ills should be added severe youth unemployment, devastation of the countryside by a grave shortage of rainfall over the past four years, and the impoverishment of the middle and lower classes by low wages and high inflation.

In response to the public unrest, the regime has released some political prisoners and pledged to end the state of emergency in force since 1963. A government spokeswoman has hinted that coming reforms will include greater freedom for the press and the right to form political parties. President Bashar al-Assad is due to address the country in the next 48 hours. His speech is eagerly awaited, but it remains to be seen whether it will be enough to defuse the crisis and win time for the regime. If not, demonstrations could gather pace, triggering still more violent repression by the security services — an escalation with unpredictable consequences.

The protesters have in fact challenged the fundamentals of Syria’s security state, a harsh system of controls over every aspect of society, put in place by the late Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father, who ruled for 30 years from 1970 to his death in 2000. By all accounts, the debate about how to deal with the growing protests has led to increasingly violent confrontations inside the regime between would-be reformers and hard-liners. The outcome of this internal contest remains uncertain.

What is certain, however, is that what happens in Syria is of great concern to the whole region. Together with its two principal allies, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Lebanese Shiite resistance movement Hezbollah, Syria is viewed with great hostility by Israel and with wary suspicion by the United States.

The Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis — of which Syria is the linchpin — has long been seen by many leaders in the region as the lone bulwark against Israeli and American hegemony. With backing from Washington, Israel has sought to smash Hezbollah (notably through its 2006 invasion of Lebanon) and detach Syria from Iran, a country Israel views as its most dangerous regional rival. Neither objective has so far been realized. But now that Syria has been weakened by internal problems, the viability of the entire axis is in danger — which could encourage dangerous risk-taking behavior by its allies as they seek to counter perceived gains by the United States and Israel.

If the Syrian regime were to be severely weakened by popular dissent, if only for a short while, Iran’s influence in Arab affairs would almost certainly be reduced — in both Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. In Lebanon, it would appear that Hezbollah has already been thrown on the defensive. Although it remains the most powerful single movement, both politically and on account of its armed militia, its local enemies sense a turning of the tide in their favor.

This might explain a violent speech delivered earlier this month by the Sunni Muslim leader and former prime minister Saad Hariri, in which he blatantly played the sectarian card.

Cheered by his jubilant supporters, he charged that Hezbollah’s weapons were not so much a threat to Israel as to Lebanon’s own freedom, independence, and sovereignty — at the hand of a foreign power, namely Iran. The Syrian uprisings may have already deepened the sectarian divide in Lebanon, raising once more the specter of civil war and making more difficult the task of forming a new government, a job President Michel Suleiman has entrusted to the Tripoli notable, Najib Mikati. If Syria were overrun with internal strife, Hezbollah would be deprived of a valuable ally — no doubt to Israel’s great satisfaction.

Meanwhile, Turkey is deeply concerned by the Syrian disturbances: Damascus has been the cornerstone of Ankara’s ambitious Arab policy. Turkey-Syria relations have flourished in recent years as Turkey-Israel relations have grown cold. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, have actively sought to mediate local conflicts and bring much-needed stability to the region by forging close economic links. One of their bold projects is the creation of an economic bloc comprising Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan — already something of a reality by the removal of visa requirements as well as by an injection of Turkish investment and technological know-how. A power struggle in Syria could set back this project; and regime change in Damascus would likely put a serious dent in further Turkish initiatives.

Turkey’s loss, however, may turn out to be Egypt’s gain. Freed from the stagnant rule of former President Hosni Mubarak, Cairo is now expected to play a more active role in Arab affairs. Instead of continuing Mubarak’s policy, conducted in complicity with Israel, of punishing Gaza and isolating its Hamas government, Egypt is reported to be pushing for a reconciliation of the rival Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah. If successful, this could help defuse the current dangerous escalation of violence between Israel on the one side and Hamas and still more extreme Gaza-based Palestinian groups on the other. But Syria’s internal troubles might just as easily have a negative effect.

Undoubtedly, the failed peace process has bred extreme frustration among Palestinian militants, some of whom may think that a sharp shock is needed to wrench international attention away from the Arab democratic wave and back to the Palestine problem. They are anxious to alert the United States and Europe to the danger of allowing the peace process to sink into a prolonged coma.

Israeli hard-liners, too, may calculate that a short war could serve their purpose: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government may sense weakness and quietly dream of finishing off Hamas once and for all. Syria has been a strong supporter of Hamas and has given a base in Damascus to the head of its political bureau, Khaled Mashal. Turmoil in Damascus could deal Hamas a severe blow.

On all these fronts — Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel — Syria is a key player. But its internal problems now threaten to reshuffle the cards, adding to the general sense of insecurity and latent violence in the region. And of all the threats facing the Middle East, perhaps the greatest — greater even than of another Arab-Israeli clash — is that of rampant sectarianism, poisoning relationships between and within states, and breeding hate, intolerance, and mistrust.

Several of the modern states of the Middle East — and Syria is no exception — were built on a mosaic of ancient religions, sects, and ethnic groups held uneasily and sometimes uncomfortably together by central government. But governments have themselves been far from neutral, favoring one community over another in cynical power plays. Many Sunni Muslims in Syria and throughout the region feel that Assad’s Syria has unduly favored the Alawites, a sect of Shiite Islam, who constitute some 12 percent of the population but control a vastly greater percentage of the country’s wealth. Open conflict between Sunnis and Alawites in Syria would profoundly disturb the whole region, creating a nightmare scenario for Washington and other Western capitals.

Meanwhile, Washington seems at a loss as to how to respond to the growing unrest in Syria. In tempered language, the administration has condemned the use of violence against civilians and encouraged political reform. But the undertones are evident: Stability in Syria may still preferable to yet another experiment in Arab governance. Assad will need to act quickly and decisively — and one hopes not harshly — to quell the rising current of dissent. Indeed, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seemed to offer the regime some modest support this weekend, noting that she believed Bashar to be a “reformer.” But reform has never been a primary goal of the Assad clan, which has long favored stability over change.
This edifice may now be crumbling, and the United States would be wise to spend a little less time thinking about Libya and a little more time thinking about a state that truly has implications on U.S. national interests. If things go south in Syria, blood-thirsty sectarian demons risk being unleashed, and the entire region could be consumed in an orgy of violence.

Patrick Seale is a British writer who specializes in Middle East affairs. His latest book is The Struggle for Arab Independence: Riad el-Solh and the Makers of the Modern Middle East. http:

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

On the Saudi 'offer' to Assad (the one he rejected)

Via FLC

"... While few expected the revolt against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak early this year to dramatically shift his country's generally pro-Western policies, Syria maintains a wider range of contacts with countries that include Iran and Russia. For decades, it has been a key player in volatile Lebanon. It has its own unresolved dispute with Israel over the Golan Heights, but is also important to Israel and the United States because of its alliance with Iran and Hezbollah, a relationship that both American and Israeli officials have encouraged Assad to break.

Iran has been chalking up diplomatic victories as pro-U.S. Arab regimes such as Mubarak's have either fallen or been challenged by democratic movements this year. But now that trouble has come to Syria, Tehran has suddenly cooled to the Arab Spring. "We are worried about the resistance against Israel," said Asad Zarei, a pro-government political analyst in Tehran. "If the changes in Syria happen in a way that the resistance is undermined, we are very worried."

Some Iranians appear to be realizing that the government's official position is untenable, and are calling on Damascus to reform. "The Syrian regime should heed the demands of people in Syria and manage the current crisis in the country," former Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki was quoted as telling students Tuesday...

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who was harshly critical of Mubarak, has long been a friend of Assad. He told a news conference Tuesday that Turkey was displeased by events in Syria. "During my conversation with Assad, I have conveyed our concern to him,"...

Lebanon's political factions are carefully watching events unfold in their influential neighbor,... Countries may also see an opportunity in Damascus' weakness. Neighboring Jordan recently decided to demand renegotiation of a water-sharing agreement from a river that traverses both nations... Saudi Arabia may be considering using its diplomatic and political influence to offer Assad a way out of his predicament, but for a price: breaking his alliance with Iran, (see Nicholas Nassif, in Al Akhbar)... One offer might be help slowing the flow of information feeding the revolt on the streets of Syria. The UAE hosts Saudi-owned Al Arabiya, one of two Arabic-language channels whose reporting has been inflaming passions across Syria, and owns the Thuraya satellite phone network used by pro-democracy activists to circumvent the secret police..."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Ban: ‘Hizbullah needs to be disarmed’

Posted on April 22, 2011 by rehmat1

On Monday, United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon submitted the 13th Biannual Report on Resolution 1559. The report was prepared by Ki-Moon’s special envoy Terje Rod Larsen. In the report he tells Lebanese how to run their national affairs in order to be accepted by the US-Israel-UN occupied ‘civilized world’.

Terje Rod Larsen PhD (born 1947), is a Norwegian diplomat and politician. Since 2004, Larsen has been the president of the International Peace Institute, a neocon think tank. He is one the most fanatic Zionist among the UN staff.

The report insists on the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559, which was adopted in 2004, that the presence of armed Resistance groups in Lebanon continues to threaten security in the country as well as the region, urging a formal border delineation with Syria. However, the report doesn’t mention the fact that it is the Zionist terrorist state which has been a threat to the security of Lebanon and its other Arab neighboring countries – by military invasions and occupation of parts of those countries.

Interestingly, the report calls Beirut for the “formal border delineation with Syria” but doesn’t mention Israel, which is only country in the world with no internationally recognized borders with all its neighboring countries.

Ki-Moon also insisted the importance of the implementation of the judgement (not known to anyone except the US and Israel) of the UN Special Tribunal on Lebanon (STL). Hizbullah and some Christian leaders have called STL an Israeli Project.

Ban issued an appeal to the Hizbullah leadership to “disarm and transform into an exclusively political party.” Ban also called on regional states to “support and assist” Hizbullah in its disarmament, “in the best interest of regional peace and stability.”

In response to Ki-Moon’s rant, Hezbollah said, “it is not new to UN Secretary General to take unjust and unfair positions in its point view of the situation in Lebanon, particularly to hold Hezbollah responsible for all the problems facing Lebanon is the nature of the task that the U.S. administration and some Western governments have entrusted and that applies with accuracy.”

Hezbollah described the UN special envoy to the Middle East, Terje Roed Larsen as “international official servant in the Zionist media system that reflects the full participation of hostility towards the Resistance, Lebanon, Arabs and all just causes in the world.”

Last year, Terje Rod Larsen, in his report to Ki-Moon had asked Lebanese government to disarm Palestinian resistance groups in the Bekaa and stop arms smuggling from Syria to these groups – based on the claim made by a reputed liar, Israeli President Shimon Peres.

So, why the western powers insist on disarming Hizbullah – because it’s the only Arab force which had defeated Jewish Army in Summer 2006.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Resistance Prevented Turning Lebanon to Israeli Settlements!

Local Editor

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General Sheikh Naim Qassem slammed on Friday UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s report over the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559 and accused the UN chief of implementing Israeli decisions.

Sheikh Qassem pointed to a WikiLeaks cable showing how the United States and Israel worked behind the scenes and pressured Ban to contain UN probes into possible war crimes committed during the 2008-2009 Gaza war.

His eminence said the UN secretary general can’t be appointed without getting the American and Israeli approval. “Ban Ki-moon implements Israeli decisions and therefore, he’s not appropriate to give us recommendations how to act in Lebanon. He can’t give us theories on ways to protect Lebanon’s dignity and to preserve security and stability in the country,” he went on to say.

Sheikh Qassem expressed belief that Lebanon would be more stable than all world countries thanks to his army, people and resistance, if the US and other countries stop interfering in its affairs.

Sheikh Qassem also criticized Ban’s report for claiming that the problem resides in the Resistance’s arms. His eminence noted that Ban seems to have forgotten that Israel is the real obstacle in the region since a hundred years. “Israel caused the aggression, occupation, massacre and emigration. Therefore, it is the origin of all the problems in the region,” his eminence noted. “If Israel was not created, the Resistance wouldn’t have seen birth. The Resistance came as a reaction to prevent the turning of Lebanon to Israeli settlements.”

His eminence said that without the Resistance and its sacrifices, Lebanon would have become under Israeli tutelage. “We’re proud to belong to the Resistance. We’re not ashamed of this fact and we don’t feel concerned by all their unfair accusations because they are issued by Israel, the US and their advisors.”

Sheikh Qassem wondered whether the UN chief forgot that some Lebanese territories, including the Shebaa farms and Kfarshouba, were occupied. His eminence also pointed Ban’s attention to the fact that the Israeli enemy was still violating the Lebanese airspace in a daily basis and to the recurrent kidnapping incidents in the South. “You can be sure, Ban Ki-moon. Without the resistance and its arms, Israel would have entered the capital Beirut. But thanks to this resistance, Israel won’t dare to commit any stupidity in Lebanon because it would fear our retaliation.”

Hezbollah Deputy Secretary General also criticized in his speech the Future party’s latest stances caused by the Syrian confessions that a Future lawmaker, MP Jamal Jarrah, was financing a terrorist cell in Syria. While noting that the issue requires judicial follow-up, Sheikh Qassem recalled the Future party officials that they used to launch “political accusations” and therefore, it’s their turn to try the experience. “This is what you have done with Syria for four years, with the four officers when you put them four years in jail based on political accusations. This is what you have also done with the Resistance for two years and a half given that the political accusation is still ongoing. Try this accusation, at least once.”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Lobby asks Obama to block Islamists ruling Egypt

Posted on April 21, 2011 by rehmat1|

 

On April 13, 2011 – Dr. Robert Satloff, executive director Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) gave his testimony to the Congressional Subcommittee in which he called for Obama administration to block the Islamist and semi-Islamist groups (Muslim Brotherhood, Gamaa Islamiya, Al-Jihad, Wasat Party and US-Saudi funded sectarian Salafist movement).

Robert Satloff told the ‘Israel-First’ US lawmakers that if some of these groups win parliamentary seats in the coming September 2011 election – they will shift future Egyptian foreign policy away from US and Israel. This may not effect much to the American interests in the Middle East – but Israel could lose its gas supply from Egypt which is subsidized by Cairo and has cost US$80 billion to Egyptian taxpayers so far. Israel’s other fears include Cairo’s opening of border with Gaza, stop policing of Sinai, developing friendly relations with Iran. Hizbullah and Hamas, opening of Suez Canal for Iranian military and commercial shipping and putting some additional demands to keep the current Israel-Egypt peace treaty.

WINEP is a Zionist Hasbara (propaganda) think tank of Israel Lobby (AIPAC). It’s also closely associated with Tel Aviv University’s Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, and was long headed by General Aharon Yariv, who had previously served as both an Israeli government minister and as head of Israeli intelligence. WINEP’s membership includes pro-Israeli American Jews, including Satloff. Dr. Satloff held a meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabli al-Arabi on April 5. Al-Arabi was appointed by the pro-US military junta in early March 2011.

Dr. Gamal Abdel Gawad, an expert on international relations at Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, ruled out the possibility that Egypt will be similar to the Iranian model of governance, saying: “Egypt is like Turkey in terms of its relations with the US and the Zionist entity”. He also added that America will not find it difficult to cope with the Freedom and Justice party, representatives of the MB, or any other Islamic forces in parliament or in government, in light of what the MB are submitting, which seeks national economic political and social harmony.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hezbollah Urges Legal Action against Future Party

Local Editor

Hezbollah renewed on Monday calls for the judiciary to take action after testimonies broadcast by the Syrian Television showed the Future was involved in the conspiracy against Syria.

“The Lebanese judiciary should act immediately to reveal the size of the Future Party’s involvement in the conspiracy against Syria, its stability and national unity,” deputy head of Hezbollah Executive Council Sheikh Nabil Qaouq said.

“Since 2005, the movement has not shied away from targeting Syria the same way it targeted the Resistance,” Sheikh Qaoud pointed out. “In fact its campaign against Syria is aimed at weakening the Resistance,” he stressed.

According to the Hezbollah official, the Future party’s involvement in the conspiracy against Syria is the greatest national sin “as it has gotten embroiled in a project that is greater than it and this will definitely affect Lebanon's national interest.”

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hezbollah: "Saad Hariri should get used to being out of power..."

FLC

"... Minister Mohammad Fneish, a key  Hezbollah official  said on Sunday that Saad Hariri should get used to being out of power despite the fact that he doesn’t like it". He added ” the offer to grant partnerships to 'other parties' is hereby rescinded, and a government that will accommodate the new majority will be formed ”

Posted by G, M, Z, or B at 3:59 PM

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

The Master of Psychological Momentum

By Zeinab Al-Saffar*

Intheireyes.info, 27-03-2011

It is yet another time and perhaps at a very critical point in the history of Arab nations when Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is not alone in his speech. It is him plus his psychological warfare silhouette guard that has long escorted him even in the absence of his real bodyguards, who are technically absent in the instant of addressing the crowds through a video link for security reasons.

No wonder he was named and branded by his loathing enemies; albeit they show respect towards his mental and psychological abilities and above all his reliability, as the "Father of the Psychological Warfare" who enjoys "microscopic capabilities" due to the mammoth effect of his words and stances on an overstretching swathe of diversified viewers and audience not only in the Arab World, but more across the continents.

In a televised address on March 19th in solidarity with the Arab peoples' mobile revolutions across various Arab states Sayyed Nasrallah's psychological warfare dictum was there in the way he addressed the rebels of Libya, "I have a final word on the Libyan topic. We have experience in wars, fighting, confrontation and psychological war also. When we look into faces we know whether these faces are disappointed, afraid or miserable. Personally and according to my experience, I found in all the faces of the revolting fighters in Libya which I looked at, I found vigor and high willingness for martyrdom and great determination not to retreat or to be defeated. This calls for hope. Indeed the situation in Libya has become very complicated today regarding the international intervention which has started and which might take Libya to the game of nations. This requires the awareness of the rebels and their nationalism which we trust highly."

Sayyed Nasrallah went on saying: "I tell them a final word. From the Resistance in Lebanon which remained steadfast for 33 days and nights while in the Lebanese skies there were more than a 100 "Israeli" warplanes shelling and demolishing and committing the worst massacres across all regions - from this victorious Resistance we extend thousand regards to the steadfast Libyan rebels in Benghazi, Ajdabya, Tabrak, Misrata and in all of the steadfast and patient Libyan cities."

Hizbullah Secretary General also extended in the same speech a similar message to the rebels in Bahrain where he elaborated more on the crucial situation over there in addition to being very successful in employing his psychological warfare element:

"Have patience and tolerance and be firm in defending your rights. I tell them because I know the faces (note here how he is keen on recharging the Bahrainis), You have a wise, rational and brave leadership. So listen to them and be harmonious with them. Brothers and sisters! Your blood and wounds will defeat the tyrants and dictatorships and will force them to recognize your legitimate rights. What you are doing today deserves sacrifices, martyrdom and industrious work even if that lasted for a long time."

In one of the reports published in the "Israeli" daily Yedioth Ahronoth done by the "Israeli" publicity committee during Lebanon's second war and put out by a subcommittee related to the another foreign and security committee specializing in foreign relations and publicity affairs it found that the "Israeli" entity failed in confronting the extensive propaganda campaign pursued by Hizbullah's Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah during the war and that the "Israeli" campaign did not succeed in allaying the fears of "Israeli" audience, on the contrary this "Israeli" campaign added to their confusion.

The report further added that the recent war has shown the vast hiatus between Hizbullah's propaganda campaign and it's only spokesperson Hassan Nasrallah with all its coherence in presenting the information and the swiftness in transmitting and broadcasting the messages on the one hand, and the "Israeli" campaign implemented by a barrage of spokespeople who lacked any prior coordination, perception, coherence and more than once have fallen into lots of paradox, mistakes and created an exaggerated optimistic mood which consequently led people to a feeling of frustration and loss.
In one of the editions of the London and Kirshenbaum news show on "Israeli" Channel 10 on January 3rd, 2007 the anchor said:

"By God! If we weren't in a state of war and enmity with Nasrallah wouldn't we‘ve been supporters of the way he understood democracy, especially that Shiites in Lebanon constitute one third of the Lebanese population. By God! I ask you does democracy bear such flagrant conflicting interpretations. There is a big difference between Hizbullah and Al-Qaeda, here we don't have conspiracies, neither vacant nonsense slogans, on the contrary here we have a democratic rational presentation, but we don't like the approach. Maybe you'll grasp from my words that I'm an extremist, but we have to say that we saw in Nasrallah a person who is an incredibly stable man with depth and great intellect and in the way he weighs matters and developments, a rational man with common sense, and yes normally we don't know everything but we can say that he's right."

In another article written by Antoine Shalhat about the repercussions of the July War of 2006 and Hizbullah's informational capabilities, quotes Dr. Oudi Leevil a prominent lecturer of political psychology- relations in the "Israeli" Army and media outlets- at the University of "Ben Gurion" as saying:

"To confront a leader who enjoys a compelling informational effect and impact like Nasrallah the "Israeli" institution must have had an equal and opposite retaliation. In this sense, the "Israeli" audience puts his trust in the leader of the enemy who we are fighting against. He further added that an informative leader must provide for the viewer 3 fundamental factors:

a-Reliability
b-Certainty
c- Suspense

By reliability we mean the truth, by certainty we mean conveying what is really going on the ground and by a sense of suspense we mean anxiously waiting to listen to his statements.
In the eyes of "Israeli" commentators and analysts Sayyed Nasrallah keeps a very close and accurate observation of the "Israeli" reports published in the Hebrew newspapers that are in direct relevance to protest movements and civil society groups, as they unveil there, every time, the power of Hizbullah's psychological warfare.

This is only a little of the flow of articles describing Sayyed Nasrallah's rhetoric which has hit hard and punctured the "Israeli" society due to the "Israelis" lack of trust in their own leaders. So are we to witness similar consequences when it comes to various revolutions in the Arab region and lead this time to Arab leaders' disintegration and erosion in face of mere words uttered by an intensely experienced man in the meaning of steadfastness and victory?

*Zeinab Al-Saffar is a freelance journalist, researcher and academic


River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

WikiLeaks: Murr Says Sleiman Will Fight Hezbollah!

Another WikiLeaks cable revealed on Saturday that Defense Minister in the caretaker government in Lebanon Elias Murr has told the Americans that President Michel Sleiman was set to fight Hezbollah till the end.

SLEIMAN WILL FIGHT HEZBOLLAH

According to the cable, Murr told then US ambassador to Beirut Michele Sisson that the president was disappointed that the independent Christians were choosing not to run in the election, citing prominent industrialist Nemat Frem inparticular.

Sleiman reportedly conveyed to Murr his “frustration” with Hezbollah, and said he would fight Hezbollah to the end. Murr said he sensed a change in Sleiman's attitude toward Hezbollah from when he was LAF Commander and believes that Sleiman is feeling increasingly hindered by Hezbollah, hence the hardening of his attitude.

Murr posited that Sleiman had expected Hezbollah would not compete strongly against the President's former aide, Nazem Khoury, for a seat in Jbeil district. Sleiman realized now, however, that Hezbollah would not make such an agreement and would strongly support its political ally Michel Aoun against Christian candidates, including Khoury, the cable quoted him as saying. Sleiman saw that Hezbollah’s only “gift” to Sleiman was the presidency, Murr said.

Murr claimed that his colleague in the cabinet, Interior Minister Ziad Baroud, had been making frequent visits to Michel Aoun's residence, which is near Murr's. When he passed thisinformation on to Sleiman, Murr said, the president threatened Baroud with making him resign.

MURR FEARS HEZBOLLAH, FPM ATTACK

During the same meeting, which took place on the eve of Murr’s visit to Washinton, the Defense Minister discussed the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) many successes and credited US military assistance. He made a plea for an additional close-air support deliverable to demonstrate to so-called moderate Lebanese Christians (whose votes key swing districts are expected to determine the outcome of the June 7 parliamentary elections) and continued US support for the moderates in Lebanon.

Murr noted that he would be the first Christian political figure from the Middle East to go to Washington since Obama's election. Appreciative of the anticipated May shipment of military equipment from the US (Ref C) and the impending arrival of the Caravan, Murr made a plea for the announcement of an additional close-air support deliverable from the US during his trip.

Murr requested "some sort of aviation to sell to Christian voters during the elections." He clarified that he knew it was unreasonable to expect an actual deliverable before the June 7 parliamentary elections, but argued that an announcement of something to come from the US would be ideal in demonstrating continued US support for the moderates in Lebanon. He also suggested that a US push for UAE provision of 10 Hawks (from the UAE's inventory of 30 Hawks to be retired) would be welcome.

Murr feared Hezbollah and Free Patriotic Movement opposition Christian leader Michel Aoun would attack him in the headlines if he returned from the US "empty-handed."

LEBANON WILL NOT ACCEPT MIG-29S BEFORE 2040

According to the cable, dated April 4, 2006, Murr relayed that the Russian Defense Minister wants to visit Lebanon. He added that the Russians have been asking when the LAF officers would go to Russia for training on the MiG-29s it offered to the LAF in December (Ref D).

Murr said he had already begun hinting to the Russians that he did not want the fighter aircraft. He reiterated to the Ambassador that Lebanon would not be accepting the MiG-29s for a long time. "Not before 2040!" he stressed.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Hezbollah Denies Members Fighting in Libya

Local Editor

Hezbollah issued on Thursday a statement in which it denied claims made by Libyan deputy FM that some members of the party were fighting alongside the revolutionists in Misrata.

Hezbollah stressed that the Libyan claims were baseless and have no foundation at all.

Earlier,Libya's deputy foreign minister, Khaled Kaim, accused Hezbollah of joining the ranks of the revolutionists fighting against Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's regime.

Kaim claimed Wednesday that several members of Hezbollah are fighting alongside the revolutionists in Misrata, but did not provide evidence.

Kaim went on to say that Qatar had sent military trainers to Libya and was supplying the fighters in Benghazi with French-made Milan anti-tank missiles.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

WikiLeaks: Hariri Backed Sleiman to ‘Embarrass’ Hezbollah!

The road to presidency was the name of the new series of WikiLeaks cables, published on Wednesday by Lebanese daily Al-Akhbar, concerning the period prior to the election on Michel Sleiman as consensus President.

The published cables showed that the head of the Future party in Lebanon Saad Hariri backed Michel Sleiman for presidency to “embarrass” Hezbollah and “harm” the head of the Change and Reform parliamentary bloc MP Michel Aoun.

They confirmed that the “battle” against Hezbollah was the essence of all challenges in the country in the eyes of Hariri’s bloc…

HARIRI SEEKS TO EMBARRASS HEZBOLLAH
According to a November 4, 2007, WikiLeaks cable, the head of the Future party Saad Hariri believed that Michel Sleiman's election as president would "embarrass" Hezbollah and harm Free Patriotic Movement leader MP Michel Aoun.

The mentioned cable spoke of a meeting between Hariri and then US Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffery Feltman during which the Future party leader informed Washington that the March 14 camp had not reached an agreement over a presidential candidate, less than a month before then President Emile Lahoud's term was scheduled to end.

However, Hariri informed Feltman of a "plan B", which called for the election of then Army Commander Michel Sleiman as president. He justified the choice by saying that Sleiman was not responsible for Hezbollah’s smuggling of arms into Lebanon.

US INITIALLY OPPOSED SLEIMAN’S ELECTION

Meanwhile, an October 16, 2007, WikiLeaks cable showed that the United States initially opposed Michel Sleiman's election as president. It spoke of a meeting between then Army Commander Michel Sleiman and then US Ambassador to Lebanon Jeffrey Feltman during which the former rejected claims that he was a "Syrian agent", voicing fears over what Damascus had in store for Lebanon.

Feltman noted in the cable that Sleiman denied that he aimed to become president and spoke highly of Defense Minister Elias Murr and Mustaqbal movement leader Saad Hariri. He was quoted as saying that "the Sunnis discovered the army thanks to Saad Hariri's support."

Sleiman also stressed the need for supporting cooperation between Hariri and the army in order to prevent the northern region of Akkar from falling victim to Islamist extremists "who are being controlled by Damascus." He added that he worked hard to maintain the Lebanese army's unity, noting that it was not an easy task.

In another meeting with Feltman, Sleiman claimed that Hezbollah supported his candidacy to the presidency in order eliminate his chance of getting elected. He explained that the party wanted to maintain the status quo in Lebanon and it did not want an agreement to be reached on its weapons. He went on to say that he wanted to establish good ties with Syria, but not at the expense of maintaining the party's arms indefinitely.

GEAGEA BACKED LAHOUD, HARB, RIZK

Another WikiLeaks cable, dated November 8, 2007, revealed that Lebanese Forces chief Samir Geagea backed Nassib Lahoud, Butros Harb and Charles Rizk "as a last resort" for the presidency.

The cable said that Geagea rejected a French initiative asking former Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir to propose a list of five possible candidates, fearing that such a move would bring a "weak president who would yield to pressure from Hezbollah and Syria."

The LF chief told Feltman that the March 14 coalition would elect a president in the parliament with majority vote of half-plus-one. However, according to the cable, Geagea warned that such a move by the former parliamentary majority would lead to a clash with Hezbollah which would then control most parts of the country.

HARIRI TO SAUDI: YES SIR!

Meanwhile, a WikiLeaks cable, dated November 3, 2007, quoted then Saudi ambassador to Lebanon Abdul Aziz Khoja as describing Hezbollah as "the devil."

The ambassador stressed that Hezbollah and Syria reject the holding of presidential elections. According to the cable, Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun had approved the postponement of the elections to improve his chances of getting elected.

Khoja also predicted that Nassib Lahoud would be elected president and Najib Miqati would be named prime minister. King Abdullah has advised Hariri to wait until after the parliamentary elections to be named prime minister, Khoja reportedly said. The leaked cable said that "Yes Sir" is Hariri's only reply to any Saudi proposal.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian