July 22, 2008 at 11:20 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: ashraf abu rahmah, information jihad, israeli army, israeli crime, jihad, occupited territories, palestine, palestinian protest, politics, zionism, zionist crime
A non-governmental agency in the occupied territories issued a photograph where a Zionist soldier shoots a Palestinian with a rubber bullet in close range.
The Palestinian was a protestor and had his hands tied and eyes covered. He was standing in front of the soldier while another officer held his arms.
According to this agency he was Ashraf Abu Rahmah, 27 years old and was injured in this incident.
After this agency protested this event and put the film and picture on television, the Israeli army announced that it will conduct the necessary investigations.
We must all stand up and not let such things happen to our Muslim brothers in the occupied territories. Wherever we are we can do something – in the west we can increase people’s awareness of what is really going on: an informational Jihad.
www.insight-info.com
1 Comment
June 29, 2008 at 4:01 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: america, american aid, american foreign policy, american military, arab, arab world, egypt, eisenhower, gaza, golan heights, israel, israeli army, israeli lobby, jewish settlements, judaism, middle east, military, opec, palestine, politics, six-day war, soviet union, suez canal, syria, united states, us, uss liberty, washington
Israel, without the United States, would probably not exist. The country came perilously close to extinction during the October 1973 war when Egypt, trained and backed by the Soviet Union, crossed the Suez Canal and the Syrians poured in over the Golan Heights. Huge American military transport planes came to the rescue. They began landing every half-hour to refit the battered Israeli army, which had lost most of its heavy armor. By the time the war as over, the United States had given Israel $2.2 billion in emergency military aid.
The intervention, which enraged the Arab world, triggered the OPEC oil embargo that for a time wreaked havoc on Western economies. This was perhaps the most dramatic example of the sustained life-support system the United States has provided to the Jewish state. Israel was born at midnight May 14, 1948. The U.S. Recognized the new state 11 minutes later. The two countries have been locked in a deadly embrace ever since.
Washington, at the beginning of the relationship, was able to be a moderating influence. An incensed President Eisenhower demanded and got Israel’s withdrawal after the Israelis occupied Gaza in 1956. During the Six-Day War in 1967, Israeli warplanes bombed the USS Liberty. The ship, flying the U.S. Flag and stationed 15 miles off the Israeli coast, was intercepting tactical and strategic communications from both sides. The Israeli strikes killed 34 U.S. Sailors and wounded 171. The deliberate attack froze, for a while, Washington’s enthusiasm for Israel. But ruptures like this one proved to be only bumps, soon smoothed out by an increasingly sophisticated and well-financed Israel lobby that set out to merge Israel and American foreign policy in the Middle East.
Israel has reaped tremendous rewards from this alliance. It has been given more than $140 billion in U.S. Direct economic and military assistance. It receives about $3 billion in direct assistance annually, roughly one-fifth of the U.S. Foreign aid budget. Although most American foreign aid packages stipulate that related military purchases have to be made in the United States, Israel is allowed to use about 25 percent of the money to subsidize its own growing and profitable defense industry. It is exempt, unlike other nations, from accounting for how it spends the aid money. And funds are routinely siphoned off to build new Jewish settlements, bolster the Israeli occupation in the Palestinian territories and construct the security barrier, which costs an estimated $1 million a mile.
The barrier weaves its way through the West Bank, creating isolated pockets of impoverished Palestinians in ringed ghettos. By the time the barrier is finished it will probably in effect seize up to 40 percent of Palestinian land. This is the largest land grab by Israel since the 1967 war. And although the United States officially opposes settlement expansion and the barrier, it also funds them.
Full article: www.insight-info.com
Leave a Comment
June 23, 2008 at 11:01 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: arab, dair yasin, dair yasin massacre, haifa, iraq, israel, israeli army, jewish, jordan, mediterranean sea, murder, mustafa kibha, palestine, politics, syria, tantura, tantura massacre, west bank, zionist
Palestinian history in the 60 years of occupation is full of murders which have been carried out by Israel against this nation. But, according to some Arab and Jewish historians, the Tantura Massacre was the most brutal massacre that the Zionists carried out against the Palestinian nation.
During the same time of the 60th anniversary of the occupation of Palestine and the Tantura Massacre the news station Al-Jazeera held a conversation between some historians researching Palestinian massacres in this region.
The Israeli army on the 23rd of May, 1948 massacred the residents of the Tantura village after occupying Haifa. After this they started exiling people from the West Bank to Jordan, Syria, and Iraq.
Mustafa Kibha, an Arab historian, stated in regards to the Tantura Massacre: “The Israel army decided to attack Tantura, which was comprised of 1500 families, because it was the weakest area south of Haifa and because of its special location next to the Mediterranean Sea. It was much easier to reach than the other villages near it.
Kibha added: “The Israeli army attacked this village on the 22nd of May, 1948 from the sea before the ground.”
This historian clearly stated: “The Israeli army attacked that village because they would send weapons and military equipment to Palestinians.”
Full article: www.insight-info.com
Leave a Comment
June 8, 2008 at 3:37 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: 1982 invasion, abu nidal abu shmidal, arab, arab countries, arab summit, arab-israeli conflict, ariel sharon, beirut, camp david, egypt, fass, history, israel, israeli aggression, israeli army, jordan, june 6, lebanon, london, menachem begin, middle east, palestine, peace for galilee, philip habib, plo, politics, rafael eltan, resistance, ronald reagan, shlomo argov, sinai, south lebanon, tel aviv, united states, yasser arafat
June 6 is a day with a special characteristic. It’s a day that marked the beginning of a new era in the Arab-Israeli conflict and paved the way for strong resistance movements to rise and eventually make a change.

On this day, twenty-six years ago, Israeli occupation forces launched a massive military incursion into Lebanon in an operation dubbed “Peace for Galilee.” At first glance, the Israeli aggression seemed to be aimed at south Lebanon, but then Defense Minister Ariel Sharon pushed all the way to the capital Beirut.
“Peace for Galilee” for the Israelis is the “Israeli Invasion” for the Lebanese. It began on 6 June, less than two months after Israel transformed its defeat in Sinai into a political victory in Camp David. Then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin got the impression that all Arab countries would follow Egypt and sign so-called peace deals with Israel.
Jordan gave its word to Israel that it would sign such treaty once Lebanon signs a similar one. The Kingdom did not want to get involved in any agreement that would put it at odds with the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) that had its leadership headquarters in Beirut.
Back then, Lebanon meant the fertile land for Palestinian resistance movements; thus dealing a blow to the PLO in Lebanon would crush the resistance once and for all and pave the way for signing a peace deal with Lebanon and then with Arab states. In doing this, Israel would extract the acknowledgment of Arabs in the so-called “state of Israel” and open the way for political and economic expansion in the Middle East region.
Menachem Begin found that the only way to achieve this “glory” for Israel was to invade Lebanon to crush the PLO, but under what pretext?
On July 24, 1981, US President Ronald Reagan’s special envoy Philip Habib arrived in Beirut with a controversial mission. Habib managed to broker a shaky nine-months ceasefire between Yasser Arafat and Israel. When the ceasefire took effect, Tel Aviv was like a beehive preparing politically and logistically for their “big time invasion.”
Back in Beirut, Israeli and pro-Israeli bodies worked persistently on straining the internal front. Clashes between Lebanese and Palestinian forces expanded throughout south Lebanon. Both forces got weak and their chances of closing ranks to confront any Israeli military operation were zero.
The element of direct military resistance was removed at a time some Arab regimes were at the Arab Summit in Fass preparing a formula to penetrate the Arab impregnability.
So everything was ready for the invasion. Israel just needed the pretext and it was not hard to find. On June 3, 1982, Israel’s ambassador in London Shlomo Argov escaped an assassination attempt.
The Israeli intelligence told Begin that the PLO was not involved in the attack, however he withheld this information from his cabinet. Rafael Eitan, who was then the Chief of Staff of the Israeli army, responded to the aforementioned information in his famous saying “Abu Nidal, abu shmidal. We need to end PLO!”
Full article: http://www.insight-info.com/articles/item.aspx?i=1156
Leave a Comment
May 25, 2008 at 11:39 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: 14th of march, al-akhbar, america, american european, ap, arabic, balbak, beirut, cia, cole, dahiyah, doha, doha accord, george bush, hassan nasrullah, hizbollah, imam khomeini, islamic revolution, israel, israeli army, khaldeh, lebanese, lebanon, ma'ariv, martyrdrom, middle east, mishel aun, mishel sulayman, molotov coctail, mosad, ottoman empire, palestine, politics, qabars, qatar, revolution, sayda, sayyid hassan nasrullah, security council, siniora, south lebanon, tyre, united nations, unity, walid jumblatt, weapon, zionist
. 26 years have passed since June 1982 were the names Dahiyah and Khaldeh passed through American and European telegrams. The youth of Dahiyah, a small village in the Southern Lebanese area of Khaldeh was able to hold the classical, prepared Israeli army for forty days with Molotov cocktails and light weapons that they already had with them. An AP reporter went to them on the 6th of September 1982 and asked them to introduce themselves. They responded: “We are the followers of Imam Khomeini. We consider death martyrdom and are not scared of any power.” The AP continued its report in September of 1982 by saying: “The spirits of the youth of Dahiyah can be seen all over South Lebanon. Tyre, Sayda, and Balbak are no less than Dahiyah either.”

Hizbollah was born with the victory of the Islamic Revolution in Lebanon and showed itself in the summer of that energetic year – 1982. It was a power which only a few people could imagine would have the power that it has today.
2. About one month ago, on the 24th of April, 2008, George Bush who prepared himself to visit the Middle East and take part in the occupied territory’s 60th anniversary gave news of America’s strong desire to topple Hizbollah. Some American and European news outlets called this a gift to Israel before his trip to occupied Palestine. A few days afterwards, Siniora’s government in an unexpected move fired the head of Beirut’s airport’s security who was a supporter of Hizbollah. It also called Hizbollah’s telephone system illegal. This move by the 14th of March political party which illegally held Lebanon’s government was faced with a serious warning by Hizbollah’s leader, Sayyid Hassan Nasrullah. At the same time, America emphasized that it will completely support the government and the American warship Cole entered Lebanon’s shores. Then, as always, Sayyid Hassan Nasrullah disgregarded America’s threats and gave Siniora a few days to retake his statements about the head of Beirut’s airport’s security and Hizbollah’s telephone system. When the government’s insistence and America’s support was seen, in a quick, accounted for move all of the centers under the control of the 14th of March political party were taken over along with their leaders. The continuance of this quick move in which America and the 14th of March PP did not expect showed the deep influence that Hizbollah has on the Lebanese people. Once again after the 33-Day-War a Lebanese struggle ended in the favor of Hizbollah. Hizbollah’s move was so unexpected from the view of America and Israel that Israel gave the order for all of its troops to be completely prepared. Some leaders of the 14th of March PP ran away from Beirut. The Siniora government, who thought itself to be strong with the backing of America only a few hours before, was forced to give in to the resistance’s orders. They retreated from what they said a few days before. According to the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar a number of CIA and Mosad officials who came to Lebanon to command this move and who stayed in the American embassy made a bridge between Beirut and Qabars escaping the situation.
It is worth mentioning that Walid Jumblatt, the head of one of the 14th of March PP’s groups who is undeniably attached to America and the Zionist regime and who escaped Beirut after the resistance’s lighting move, made fun of America’s promise of help in an interview and said: “Apparently the American Cole was sent to save us from Lebanon – not to help us in Lebanon.”
3. After the Hizbollah victory, which according to the Lebanese newspaper al-Akhbar was a slap in face to America before it was a blow on the 14th of March PP, the demands of Hizbollah that were made after their victory in the 33-Day-War were once again put uat the forefront. The reason for this is that after Hizbollah’s victories the resistance in Lebanon is not seen as a mere political power, rather as the Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv wrote: “Hizbollah showed that it is a popular movement and has took the power of the country who trusts and believes in them.”
The Doha Talks with the presence of Arabic foreign ministers, representatives of the resistance, and the 14th of March PP lead by Qatar was formed in this situation. From the beginning the Doha Talks could do nothing except give in to some of Hizbollah’s demands. It is clearly expected that Hizbollah will gain strength and the 14th of March PP will loose power, although most of the Arabs who took part in the talks wanted to protect the power of the 14th of March PP more than make Hizbollah loose power. Therefore, Hizbollah’s victory in the Doha Talks proves their strength – not that the things given to them makes them strong. Because of Hizbollah’s moves in the past two years the 14th of March PP did not have any other choice but to accept what the decisions in the Doha Talks were.
4. Hizbollah’s demands were: the establishment of the national-unified government, Mishel Sulayman becoming president, and 11 seats of the parliament (one-third reserved for the resistance) which gives them the power of veto. This plan was called the Mishel ‘Aun plan and was accepted in Doha. It should be noted that when these talks were announced Lebanese people in Beirut and other places protested saying that the Lebanese political heads have rigged these talks. They said: “This helped speed up the process.
5. The most important result of the Doha Talks was Hizbollah crossing the limits. Hizbollah created a nation in the past few years by their faith, bravery, sincerity, popularity, and their lives while protecting Lebanon and its entire population regardless of their religion or tribe. They brought a country who has been at discord and internal war since the Ottoman empire to a unified position showing that Lebanon’s peace will only be in unity.
6. After the results of the Doha Talks were mentioned American figures such as Khalilzad, Afghanistan’s representative in the United Nations said that they were going to make a United Nations Security Council resolution regarding Hizbollah. They said that since Hizbollah has turned national so the resolution number 1701 is illegal and nobody has the right to interfere in internal politics – making Siniora’s American backed movement illegal.
source
1 Comment
May 6, 2008 at 7:41 am (Uncategorized)
Tags: baassim, charitable islamic society, christian, christian peace maker, girl, hamas, hebron, ics, israel, israeli army, israeli government, orphanage, prison
At 1.00 in the morning on the 30th of April, the Israeli Army raids orphanage in Hebron, home to 110 girls, seizing all equipment from community sewing workshop. The Hebron Orphanage for girls is run by the Charitable Islamic Society,(I.C.S) and houses 110 children.

The ICS is accused by Israel of funding the Hamas movement under the table, and in recent years, the ICS has been raided several times by the Israeli Army who seized computers and paper work from their offices. Now the Israeli government wants to take property owned by the ICS and has issued a court order to this effect. Bassim the director of the Hebron orphanage for girls says that the Israeli officials came and inspected a sewing work shop in the basement, a project set up to give local women whose husbands are in gaol a means of earning a living.
The official forbade any one from working in the room he photographed and made an inventory of all sewing machines and related equipment in the basement.He forbade Bassim from moving the workshop elsewhere threatening him with a prison sentence of five years were he to do so, he then said that the army would come and remove the equipment after the 26th of April 2008. The Christian Peace Maker teams were concerned about the effects of such a raid on the children so began to sleep over night in the orphanage. At one in the morning on the 30th of April the army drove three trucks into the playground of the orphanage, one equipped with a winch for hauling heavy equipment.They sawed up the metal table for cutting fabric with an angle grinder, and seized everything from the workshop including the stock of clothes sewn by the women.They swept the floor and left taking everything leaving the room utterly void.The Christian Peace Maker Teams tried to speak with the soldiers about their actions, but they refused to engage and completely ignored them.
Taken from: www.insight-info.com
Leave a Comment