The purposes of the Riyadh Meeting

The movements of the Saudi Arabian government after the Gaza War, where the Zionist army was defeated, are trying to show that this victory was accomplished by the political efforts of Saudi Arabia and Egypt – enabling the resistance to succeed.

In the last few weeks a few Saudi Arabian officials have travelled to Damascus just as a number of Egyptian have as well. Jordan, by sending an official letter and a political representative, wanted to join forces with them. A few meetings took place chaired by King Abdullah and attended by some Arab heads of state, including the Syrian president. The latest meeting was last Wednesday in Riyadh where King Abdullah, the kind of Saudi Arabia, Hosni Mubarak, the president of Egypt, Jaber al-Ahmad al-Sabbah, the prince of Kuwait, and Bashar Asad, the president of Syria attended.

The Saudi king announced in an economical meeting of the heads of Arab states held in Kuwait the day after the Gaza War ended: “Now the time to bury the differences of Arabs has come.” Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister took a step further and said in an interview: “The Kuwait Summit buried the differences of Arabs.” The Syrian president rejected this. Bashar Asad, in an interview with the Emirate newspaper Dar al-Khaleej, said: “We are now trying to make up and we cannot confirm that we do not have any differences with each other.”

Immediately after the meeting in Riyadh on Wednesday, Hosni Mubarak met with King Abdullah of Jordan in Amman. The head of Mubarak’s office stated that it was a continuation of the Riyadh meeting. Amr Moussa, the secretary-general of the League of Arab States, entered Damascus. It has been decided that there will be another meeting of Arab leaders in Qatar in the next few weeks.

This shows the unified activities of Riyadh, Amman, and Cairo around one foundational axis. Everyone knows that the Islamic resistance in the region is the biggest problem for the three Arab states (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan) and also the biggest problem for the Zionist regime, America, and the west. Since Syria has a strategic relationship with Iran and the resistances in Lebanon and Palestine, it has been given great importance by this group. American and Arab groups have clearly mentioned the possibility of separating Syria from Iran and the resistance and the possibility of establishing two states – Palestine and Israel – in the occupied territories if peace between Syria and Israel is accomplished. The political organization Khawar, close to Washington, announced in the Christian Science Monitor in regards to a conclusion about the political changes in the Middle East that America, through Saudi Arabia, will try its best to put Syria in line with American policies which would necessitate it distancing itself from Iran. This American publication clearly stated that the reason that Israel lost in its war against Palestine was because the Saudi Arabian-Egyptian pole has become weak.

The meetings and talks amongst the four countries (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Syria) and the multiple travels of political figures to and from these countries must bee looked at with precision. The reason for this is that the resistance in the Middle East depends on the strength of Iran and Syria. Any weakness will have foundational consequences in the Middle East. In order to look into this subject, it must be said that:

1. Syria has been struggling since 1967, when the Golan Heights and Jabal Sheikh were occupied by the Zionist regime. These two places were not only strategic and economical, but they were considered a sign of the existence of the government in Damascus. Now, Syria sees an international opportunity and wants to test what would happen by claiming the loss of Golan and Jabal Sheikh. The victory of the resistance in Gaza and Hizbollah in Lebanon increases the world’s need of Syria in the eyes of Bashar. From another angle, Bashar Asad sees the dead-end that the meetings between Arab and Israeli figures in regards to the two-state solution have reached as another opportunity for Syria. The Syrian government does not give clear answers in regards to the questions about whether or not they are ready to change their relationship with the resistance or not. But, they emphasize that the peace process is not possible without the powers of the region – Hizbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine – participating in it.

2. Saudi Arabia and Egypt are holding talks with Syria in order to weaken Iran and the Arab resistance in the region. They believe that if they tempt Syria with financial benefits and the return of the strategic Golan Heights then the chain of resistance in the region will be broken and the ancient Arab movement called nationalism will replace Islam. They believe that nationalism will be enlivened and honor will be returned to these two countries. Some time ago the president of Egypt in a public address stated: “Iran is stealing the Middle East and we cannot remain silent.” If he was more precise he would have stated that Islam has taken over the Middle East and that he must find a way to take control back. At the same time it must be said that Egypt and Saudi Arabia have an internal fight as well. Egyptians consider themselves the leaders of the Arab world while Saudi Arabia believes that their status has fallen in the last thirty years.

3. Jordan and Kuwait are playing a supportive role in this movement. They are not that important. But, the presence of Kuwait emphasized the principle role of Saudi Arabia and the presence of Jordan emphasizes the principle role of Egypt. King Abdullah of Jordan and Sheikh Ahmad Sabbah of Kuwait state that they benefits of their countries are in this movement. Jordan expects Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to save it from the economical fall that it is facing along with the whole world.

4. Saudi Arabia and Egypt face many problems in these talks. One of the problems is that they want Syria to trade the relationship that it has with the resistance, which is its strongest point of honor, for a promise to give back the Golan Heights. Bashar, even though he is young, knows well that political talks and promises from Arab governments have never given results. Because of this the president of Syria states that there are differences between the contracts of peace and real peace.

5. America, after the 22-Day-War against Gaza emphasized that Israel cannot fight and must improve their conditions through diplomacy. It seems far-fetched that America is hopeful that Syria will weaken their relation with Iran and the resistance. They believe that they can make Syria change a little bit and make them think about their relationship with Iran and with America. They believe that with this the progress of Islam in the Middle East will be thwarted and the possibility of American management over the region will increase. But, this issue is just American brainstorming.

6. Another side of this issue is the Zionist regime. This regime is in a very weak state right now and does not have the ability to discuss the issue of Golan. If they debate this topic, as Bashar says, they are not ready to agree to anything. The Zionist regime believes in its internal strength and if they give back Golan Heights they will loose their existence – just as retreating from Gaza four years ago caused them to loose their security. In these conditions it is highly unlikely that Saudi Arabia could promise anything more than financial benefits to Syria. Because of this the president of Syria stated, knocking down Saudi Arabia and Egypt: “Peace treaties are nothing more than a piece of paper. But the reality is that 500 thousand Palestinians are in Syria. They must return to their homes and Golan must be given back to Syria. Until this happens there will be no changes.”

Islam Times

Advertisements

The Gaza war – the defeat of Zionism and cultural Arabs

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate the Merciful

The unfortunate events that are taking place in Gaza, with all of its moving dimensions, burns the hearts of all freemen throughout the world. Infants without heads, children drowning in blood, mothers who lost everything that they had – their children and husband – at one time, and the destruction with the owners imprisoned under their destroyed buildings for eternity are rendering. But, this is only one side of the Gaza situation. The other side is the amazing resistance that the oppressed people are showing. They are not struggling against the Zionists alone, rather they are also being punished at the same time by the hatred of trader Arab regimes.

The reports that have been seen show that this tragic event in Gaza occurs from that which the regimes of cultural Arabs want and the profit that America has made from oil transactions. The profits that they made went straight into Israeli military weapons – cluster bombs, phospheric bombs, lazer weapons, and duzmaneh bombs which also came from the pockets of Arabs and from the Muslim treasury. The media in the corners of the world discovered many secrets and they leaked that the plans of this war started in meetings with political members of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan on the one side and Israel and America in Egypt on the other. The reason that Bush, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and Shimon Perez, the president of Israel, in New York under the banner of religious dialogue was discovered. Teiri Mayson, a French researcher, establishes this with small differences and shows that the Camp David regime of Egypt, the Saudi family regime, and the Zionist regime are three sides of a triangle which planned and are carrying out the attack on Gaza. Mayson clearly stated that Saudi Arabia and Egypt are Israel’s allies in this war for the first time in history.

Other sources did not mention the participation of Jordan in the meetings in Egypt. But, while confirming the rest of the cases that made up the multiple meetings in the last couple of months, speak of cooperation between Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel. In history Arab regimes have opened their hands up to Israeli crimes against Palestine, but for the first time they have become Israel’s allies and are pressuring Israel to completely destroy Hamas.

Other sources report the direct involvement of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Arabia’s security advisor, in the evil events that are taking place. Bandar bin Sultan who traveled to Israel twice right after the 33-Day-War against Lebanon and accepted the Saudi Arabian payment for new wars against Hizbollah. He insisted that Ehud Olmert and other Israeli political figures to start a new war against Hizbollah. Olmert and his partners wanted to use this golden oppurtunity to use their strategic experience, but the dimensions and depth of Israel’s defeat in Lebanon was so great that no Israeli or military or security official was willing to start a new round of war in Lebanon, even if Saudi Arabia is paying for it. They said that Israel would loose.

Now Israel and Arab regimes have played their roles to the full and, as Mayson states, the Zionist triangle has let its dogs loose to do whatever they can. The newspaper Yehudiat Arinovut spoke of the Jordan, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia’s demand from Olmert – the complete destruction of Hamas and not to allow Ismail Haniyah to become a second Nasrallah. At the same time Shimon Eshtein, Israel’s previous ambassador to the United Nations, leaded that Mahmoud Abbas, along with this evil triangle, wanted Israel to forget about the political environment in the world and to destroy Hamas – to hit Gaza so hard so that it will never be able to stand on its two feet again.

Now we greater understand the inhumane measures that Mubarak has recently committed in closing the Rafah Crossing. The crossing was closed at the request of Mahmoud Abbas and with the support of the leaders of Egypt and Jordan. At the same time they requested that the Israeli military to completely surround Gaza.

It would be good to go over this issue one more time so no doubt remains about the cultural Arabs desire for the Zionist regime to win the war in Gaza and that they encouraged the Zionist regime many times in order to start such a war. With Israel’s defeat in this war both sides, the traitor Arabs and the Israelis will feel like nothing.

Mubarak’s physical condition in the past few days has been reported as being very ill. This is because of the huge defeat that the Camp David regime feels in regards to the weakness of the Israeli army. The Israeli warmongering regime wanted to win in Gaza and have their political party be introduced as the victors. But, the pure blood of the oppressed people in Gaza will cause their defeat – this is the culture of history.

Today, what will Mubarak say to the Egyptian nation and the rest of the Arab world? How will he explain his cooperation with the occupying forces in the genocide of the people of Gaza? How can the ‘servants of the two holy places’ the Saudi Arabians explain their part in the genocide against the people of Gaza. The triangle of Bush, the cultural Arabs, and Israel tried to make in the last few days of the neocon government has destroyed itself and there is no more credibility left for these evil leaders. They have transformed the United Nations, the Security Council, and all other international organizations into a laughing stock. But, practically, they think more about their weak plans than ever, they rebuke each other, and this is the continuous culture of history.

Insight-info

Israel’s Ultimate Goal

Why does Israel continue to build settlements on the west bank and continue its expansionist policies? The ultimate goal is to capture all of ‘Eretz Israel’. The ‘Promised Land’ extends from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates. It includes parts of Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, a bit of Turkey and Saudi Arabia. Yasser Arafat always used to keep an Israeli coin in his pocket showing Israel with the ‘Eretz Israel’ borders, to remind people that they shouldn’t be fooled by the Zionists, as they have no defined borders and continue to expand their land.

see pictures at: www.insight-info.com

Eretz Israel

Eretz Israel

The Tantura Massacre one month after the Dair Yasin Massacre

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

The Attemps of America for Permanent Occupation of Iraq

The security, political, and economic resolution- with that America has a particular importance and position which enables it to have many important effects on the middle east, but unfortunately, for many reasons, this hasn’t been published as thoroughly in the news stations.

 America Iraq

According to the report of the news agency Fars, the political, military, and security personal of America had spoken about the ((Attempts of America for Permanent Occupation of Iraq)) beginning in 2007. Rice, Cheney, and Bush have tried more than others to make hopeful the allies of America around the world for the ((Future Conditions)).

 

The Americans, with several trips to the area of the Persian Gulf and some of the neighboring countries of Iraq, such as Jordan and Egypt, have mentioned points about the ((Change in political and security conditions in Iraq)) and by this they have made these countries help in Iraq’s new design by America. To this point the Arab countries have gone forward with mistrust to the extent that Zulma Khalilzade, the previous ambassador of America in Iraq and the present ambassador of Iraq in the United Nations, had condemned the Arab countries and said that by ‘abandoning Iraq’ they have laid the grounds for the influence of Iran in ‘an Arab country’, Iraq, and ordered them to immediately reopen their embassies to Iraq in Baghdad.

Full article: www.insight-info.com

US accused of holding terror suspects on prison ships

· Report says 17 boats used

· MPs seek details of UK role

· Europe attacks 42-day plan

 Duncan Campbell and Richard Norton-Taylor

 The Guardian,

 Monday June 2 2008

 

The United States is operating “floating prisons” to house those arrested in its war on terror, according to human rights lawyers, who claim there has been an attempt to conceal the numbers and whereabouts of detainees.

Details of ships where detainees have been held and sites allegedly being used in countries across the world have been compiled as the debate over detention without trial intensifies on both sides of the Atlantic. The US government was yesterday urged to list the names and whereabouts of all those detained.

Information about the operation of prison ships has emerged through a number of sources, including statements from the US military, the Council of Europe and related parliamentary bodies, and the testimonies of prisoners.

The analysis, due to be published this year by the human rights organisation Reprieve, also claims there have been more than 200 new cases of rendition since 2006, when President George Bush declared that the practice had stopped.

It is the use of ships to detain prisoners, however, that is raising fresh concern and demands for inquiries in Britain and the US.

According to research carried out by Reprieve, the US may have used as many as 17 ships as “floating prisons” since 2001. Detainees are interrogated aboard the vessels and then rendered to other, often undisclosed, locations, it is claimed.

Ships that are understood to have held prisoners include the USS Bataan and USS Peleliu. A further 15 ships are suspected of having operated around the British territory of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, which has been used as a military base by the UK and the Americans.

Reprieve will raise particular concerns over the activities of the USS Ashland and the time it spent off Somalia in early 2007 conducting maritime security operations in an effort to capture al-Qaida terrorists.

At this time many people were abducted by Somali, Kenyan and Ethiopian forces in a systematic operation involving regular interrogations by individuals believed to be members of the FBI and CIA. Ultimately more than 100 individuals were “disappeared” to prisons in locations including Kenya, Somalia, Ethiopia, Djibouti and Guantánamo Bay.

Reprieve believes prisoners may have also been held for interrogation on the USS Ashland and other ships in the Gulf of Aden during this time.

The Reprieve study includes the account of a prisoner released from Guantánamo Bay, who described a fellow inmate’s story of detention on an amphibious assault ship. “One of my fellow prisoners in Guantánamo was at sea on an American ship with about 50 others before coming to Guantánamo … he was in the cage next to me. He told me that there were about 50 other people on the ship. They were all closed off in the bottom of the ship. The prisoner commented to me that it was like something you see on TV. The people held on the ship were beaten even more severely than in Guantánamo.”

Clive Stafford Smith, Reprieve’s legal director, said: “They choose ships to try to keep their misconduct as far as possible from the prying eyes of the media and lawyers. We will eventually reunite these ghost prisoners with their legal rights.

“By its own admission, the US government is currently detaining at least 26,000 people without trial in secret prisons, and information suggests up to 80,000 have been ‘through the system’ since 2001. The US government must show a commitment to rights and basic humanity by immediately revealing who these people are, where they are, and what has been done to them.”

Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on extraordinary rendition, called for the US and UK governments to come clean over the holding of detainees.

“Little by little, the truth is coming out on extraordinary rendition. The rest will come, in time. Better for governments to be candid now, rather than later. Greater transparency will provide increased confidence that President Bush’s departure from justice and the rule of law in the aftermath of September 11 is being reversed, and can help to win back the confidence of moderate Muslim communities, whose support is crucial in tackling dangerous extremism.”

The Liberal Democrat’s foreign affairs spokesman, Edward Davey, said: “If the Bush administration is using British territories to aid and abet illegal state abduction, it would amount to a huge breach of trust with the British government. Ministers must make absolutely clear that they would not support such illegal activity, either directly or indirectly.”

A US navy spokesman, Commander Jeffrey Gordon, told the Guardian: “There are no detention facilities on US navy ships.” However, he added that it was a matter of public record that some individuals had been put on ships “for a few days” during what he called the initial days of detention. He declined to comment on reports that US naval vessels stationed in or near Diego Garcia had been used as “prison ships”.

The Foreign Office referred to David Miliband’s statement last February admitting to MPs that, despite previous assurances to the contrary, US rendition flights had twice landed on Diego Garcia. He said he had asked his officials to compile a list of all flights on which rendition had been alleged.

CIA “black sites” are also believed to have operated in Thailand, Afghanistan, Poland and Romania.

In addition, numerous prisoners have been “extraordinarily rendered” to US allies and are alleged to have been tortured in secret prisons in countries such as Syria, Jordan, Morocco and Egypt.

26 Years on 1982 Invasion, Resistance Made the Change

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.

us embassy beirut


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