LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
ِJune 04/2010

Bible Of the Day
The Good News According to John 15/17-24
15:17 “I command these things to you, that you may love one another. 15:18 If the world hates you, you know that it has hated me before it hated you. 15:19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. But because you are not of the world, since I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. 15:20 Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his lord.’* If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will keep yours also. 15:21 But all these things will they do to you for my name’s sake, because they don’t know him who sent me. 15:22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. 15:23 He who hates me, hates my Father also. 15:24 If I hadn’t done among them the works which no one else did, they wouldn’t have had sin. But now have they seen and also hated both me and my Father. 15:25 But this happened so that the word may be fulfilled which was written in their law, ‘They hated me without a cause.’

Free Opinions, Releases, letters, Interviews & Special Reports
Turkish-Iranian Competition/By: Hassan Haidar/June 03/10
The Gaza Flotilla’s Skirmish At Sea Diverted Attention From Hezbollah’s Weapons Imports. By: Dr. Walid Phares/June 03/10
Another Middle East War on the Horizon/By: Joshua Gleis/June 03/10
Iran and the STL frame Lebanon’s summer/By: Jean-Luc Vannier/June 3, 10
Kassir's legacy and reform/Daily Star/June 03/10

Latest News Reports From Miscellaneous Sources for June 03/10
Sfeir from Airport: We Support One Regular Army, is Unacceptable to Have Two Armies in One Country/Naharnet
Sfeir Heads to Cyprus to Welcome Pope/Naharnet
Nasrallah Calls Rally in Solidarity with Freedom Fleet Activists, Hails Their Courage/Naharnet
Ban: Israel Must lift Gaza Blockade Immediately/Naharnet
Geagea: Why is it When Someone Wants to Target the PM He Does so by Attacking the Budget?/Naharnet
Geagea: Hizbullah's Arms Useless As Long As International Community Stands by Israel/Naharnet
Arab League Meeting Ends with Pledge to 'Break' Gaza Siege/Naharnet
Netanyahu Defends Flotilla Raid, Gaza/AP
All Aboard -- Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists, Hezbollah Journalist/MEMRI
Analysis: Erdogan tests Turkey's role as bridge/The Associated Press
A Botched Raid, a Vital Embargo/New York Times
Suleiman, Abbas Call for Establishment of Commission to Probe Israeli Attack/Naharnet
Reports: Suleiman-Assad Summit in Damascus Next Week/Naharnet
Uproar Over Berri's Demand for 'Explanations' on $11 billion Spending/Naharnet
Four Lebanese flotilla passengers return home/Daily Star

Sfeir from Airport: We Support One Regular Army, is Unacceptable to Have Two Armies in One Country
Naharnet/Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir stressed on Thursday his support for one regular army in Lebanon. He said from the airport before heading to Larnaka: "It is unacceptable to have two armies in one country.""An organized army knows how to protect Lebanon," he added. Furthermore, he said that Israel's attack on the Freedom Fleet is not a new development for "we have grown accustomed to its assaults." Sfeir and an accompanying delegation are headed to Cyprus, at an invitation from Cyprus' Maronite Archbishop Youssef Sweif, to meet with Pope Benedict XVI who is visiting the country.

Nasrallah Calls Rally in Solidarity with Freedom Fleet Activists, Hails Their Courage
Naharnet/Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah stressed on Thursday that Israel's attack on the Freedom Fleet has "very important connotations".
He said at a gathering commemorating the 21st anniversary of the death of the Iranian Islamic Republic's founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, that the scenes from the Freedom Fleet "are those of courage, honesty, and sacrifice" by all those on board. He called on all the Lebanese, Palestinians, and Arabs in Lebanon to participate at a massive rally on Friday at 8:30 pm at the Raya stadium in a show of support for and pride in the besieged Palestinian people in Gaza and the heroes of the fleet. He said that he will announce the stance he had prepared over the attack at Friday's rally. Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 18:30

Geagea: Why is it When Someone Wants to Target the PM He Does so by Attacking the Budget?
Naharnet/Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea said on Thursday that it is unfortunate that some sides would involve politics in matters that concern people's daily lives.
He added: "Why is it that when someone wants to criticize the prime minister he does so by attacking the budget?"He made his statements after holding talks with Prime Minister Saad Hariri at the Grand Serail.The two sides discussed internal matters including the 2010 state budget.Addressing Israel's release of Lebanese captive activists who were on the Freedom Fleet, he said: "This is how Israel is confronted," and not through a show of strength.On Wednesday, Geagea noted that "Hizbullah's arms are of no use as long as the international community stands by Israel," warning that "we have started to head toward the storm due to the behavior taking place on the Lebanese territory."
"Lebanon is actually in the eye of the storm and the intensive visits of foreign and Arab diplomats to Beirut prove that," Geagea added during an interview on Future News TV.
"In any confrontation between Israel and Hizbullah, the international community will stand by Israel, but if the confrontation was between Israel and the Lebanese State, we'd have at least 50% chance of gaining the international community's support," Geagea said."The build-up of Hizbullah's military capabilities does not strengthen Lebanon and I don't think that Hizbullah would use its weapons in the Lebanese interior, but it is very important that these arms be placed under the command of the State."
Answering a question on his recent criticism of President Michel Suleiman, Geagea said: "The president's reformist approach is immaculate and he takes the major credit, together with (Interior) Minister (Ziad) Baroud, for the occurrence of the municipal elections.""I disagree with the president over one point: Hizbullah's arms, and at least half of the Lebanese share me this viewpoint," Geagea added."The March 14 Alliance, at the political and popular levels, is not with the 'people-army-resistance' theory, and the national dialogue table convened because there is an essential dispute over this topic; and President Suleiman must take that into consideration."Geagea called on Suleiman "to truly remain a president for all the Lebanese, especially regarding this issue." Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 16:11

Controversial flotilla members ignored
2 June 2010
http://www.justjournalism.com/media-analysis/view/controversial-profiles-ignored
Since Israel has started releasing detained activists from the Gaza-bound flotilla, their testimonies have received prominent coverage. For example, the BBC News website has produced an article of eyewitness accounts from four different individuals, describing their experiences. Several of the same individuals were quoted in a similar article in The Guardian, ‘We heard gunfire – then our ship turned into lake of blood’.
While the media has been keen to provide the perspective of some activists upon the boats, and to contrast their views with the video footage of Israeli commandos being attacked en masse, as of yet there has been very little background on some of the more controversial figures who were part of the flotilla.
For example, several senior figures from the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood were present, as was a bishop who had already been convicted and imprisoned by Israel for weapons-smuggling. This continues the trend in the media to emphasise one element of the protesters, while ignoring the extremist links and dispositions of others, as documented by Just Journalism here.
As of yet, none of the figures profiled below have been mentioned in relation to the flotilla by any of the broadsheets or the BBC News website:
Bishop Hilarion Capucci
Aboard the Mavi Marmara
No known affiliations
Convicted and imprisoned in the 1970s for smuggling weapons from Lebanon to the PLO
An article in The Daily Telegraph from 2009 described him as a ‘veteran Palestinian rights campaigner’, without mentioning his conviction
Muhammad Al-Baltaji
Ship unknown
Deputy secretary-general, Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood parliamentary bloc
‘[We] will never recognize Israel and will never abandon the resistance’
Sheikh Jalal Al-Sharqi
Ship unknown
Head of the Association of Islamic Scholars in the GCC Countries
Signed a clerics' petition calling to acknowledge Hamas's legitimacy, and to not prevent it from obtaining weapons.
Salam Al-Falahat
Ship unknown
General guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan from 2006 to 2008
‘We see Hamas movement in Palestine as standing at the head of the project of the Arab and Islamic liberation for which the Muslim Brotherhood calls... The Muslim Brotherhood supports Hamas and every Arab resistance movement in the region that works for liberation.’
Hazza' Al-Maswari
Ship unknown
Yemeni MP for Muslim Brotherhood-linked Al-Islah party
Critisised plans to de-radicalise captured Al-Qaeda members:
‘We cannot tell militants 'don't terrorize Americans' or 'don't attack their interests.' Those who plant hatred will harvest hatred.’

All Aboard -- Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists, Hezbollah Journalist
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2010/06/all_aboard_muslim_brotherhood.html
MEMRI has published a must-read who's who list of participants in this week's flotilla hailing from Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and beyond -- senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a former employee of Hezbollah's Al Manar network (deemed a terror entity by the United States and banned in several European countries), Kuwaiti Salafists who support "armed resistance" in Iraq, and more. It also identified the "cutting edge humanitarian activist", pictured below, as Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hazmi, a Yemeni MP from the Al-Islah party, which is close to the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of these flotilla participants prepared wills ahead of their departure, with full expectations of violent confrontation and anticipation of martyrdom.
The truth behind the ship's manifest is a far cry from the claims of pacifism voiced by an IHH official yesterday in the New York Times and today in the International Herald Tribune that:
"Our volunteers were not trained military personnel," said Yavuv Dede, deputy director of the organization. "They were civilians trying to get aid to Gaza. There were artists, intellectuals and journalists among them. Such an offensive cannot be explained by any terms."
Journalists including Jordanian Muhammad Abu Ghanima, "a former head of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan's information bureau and a member of the movement's political bureau," and Lebanese Abbas Nasser, who worked for Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV from 1997 through 2003.
Instead of selectively mentioning the participation of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mairead Corrigan-Maguire, will the mainstream media now call out the not-so-peaceful participants, including Dr. Hani Suleiman, the pro bono attorney for Japanese terrorist Kozo Okamoto, responsible for the massacre of 25 people in Israel's international airport?
*Posted by TS at June 2, 2010

Netanyahu Defends Flotilla Raid, Gaza
JERUSALEM (AP) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected international criticism of a deadly raid against a flotilla carrying aid to Gaza earlier this week, saying the blockade of the Palestinian territory is needed to prevent missile attacks against Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The comments came hours after all remaining pro-Palestinians activists from the aid ships were sent to Ben-Gurion airport near Tel Aviv to be deported. About a dozen female activists scuffled with security officers at the airport but were quickly subdued by authorities, Israeli officials said. Officials said Wednesday no charges will be filed and the women, along with hundreds of other activists, will be deported as planned. Israel has come under harsh international condemnation after its commandos stormed a six-ship aid flotilla Monday in international waters, setting off clashes that killed nine activists and wounded dozens. The nearly 700 activists -- including 400 Turks -- were trying to break the 3-year-old Israeli and Egyptian naval blockade of the Gaza Strip by bringing in 10,000 tons of aid.Turkey's parliament called on its government Wednesday to review all ties with Israel as the country prepared to welcome home Turkish activists who had been detained after Israel's bloody raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. Israel rejects claims that Gaza -- which has been under an Israeli and Egyptian blockade since the Islamic militant group seized power in 2007 -- is experiencing a humanitarian crisis. Israel says it allows more than enough food, medicines and supplies into the territory. Netanyahu insisted the blockade was needed to prevent militants from being able to carrying out attacks against Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

The Gaza Flotilla’s Skirmish At Sea Diverted Attention From Hezbollah’s Weapons Imports
By: Dr. Walid Phares
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6361/pub_detail.asp
June 2, 2010
At first glance, the takeover by the Israeli Navy of the “humanitarian flotilla” heading towards Gaza is just one more of the disputed crises between Israel and its foes. As in all previous incidents, the spiral of accusations will eventually reach bottom. While media attention will highlight the tactical events - seizure of the ships, rules of engagement, who fired first, the legal location of the incident and the other dramatic details - the rapidly expanding debate will soon reach the strategic intent of the “flotilla.” After all the governments involved issue their condemnations and warnings in all directions, after the UN conferences and issues a statement and international forums mobilize to indict their predictably targeted foe - in this case Israel - the question unavoidably will be: why is there a flotilla heading towards a military zone, and what is the ultimate goal of the operation?
According to the organizers of the “Free Gaza” network which enjoys the support of Hamas and its backers in Damascus and Tehran but also of governments considered in the West as “mainstream” such as the AKP of Turkey and the oil rich Qatar, this vast coalition of regimes and organizations assert that the aim of the 700 militants and activists was to pierce the encirclement of Gaza and lift the naval blockade of the enclave.
Hence the actual goal of the humanitarian effort is to relieve Hamas, not to ensure aid to the civilians trapped in the strip. For if aid and comfort was the sole objective of the operation, the material would have been calmly handed to the United Nations’ agencies which would have forwarded it to the network of humanitarian associations and NGOs inside the afflicted zone. Either Egypt or Israel would have checked it and would have, under international obligation, sent it across the cease fire lines.
But the organizers of the flotilla, a vast coalition supporting the Jihadist organization based in Gaza, aimed clearly at a geopolitical gain: open a maritime path for Hamas to receive strategic support from the outside and solidify its grip over the enclave.
Spokespersons for the “flotilla” would obviously deny the long term goal and focus on the humanitarian stated agenda. But had the architects of the initiative added a global plan to solve the crisis in Gaza, one would have given credit to the humanitarian version of the story. From Ankara to Doha, from Damascus to Tehran, policy planners are aiming at reaching “their piece” of Palestine, ironically at the expense of the Palestinian national authority.
Indeed, beyond the evaluation on tactical or legal grounds and who should be blamed, the picture on the strategic level is much more ominous. The launching of the “flotilla” timed up with two major developments, one by the moderates in the region backed by the United States and the international community and the other by the radicals in the region led by Iran and Syria. After repeated attempts to bring Israelis and Palestinians back to the table of negotiations over the past few months, Washington was close to achieving that goal with the help of moderate Arab governments and the European Union.
The Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government were on their way to a sit down – direct or indirect - to proceed at an advanced stage in the process. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and other players were blessing the move cautiously. But this process was moving outside the control of Iran and Syria and their protégés in Gaza.
Hence sending activists via high seas to break the encirclement of Hamas was part of collapsing US and international efforts to resume the peace talks. Indeed as we all know, once the radicals trigger (and organize) a wave of “Jihadism” in the media and streets, no moderate will show up for discussions. And that’s what is happening as of today: a spiraling crumbling of the latest chance for peace talks.
This is not new: It is a modified repeat of previous manipulated incidents: The Hezbollah War in 2006, the Hamas coup of 2007, the Gaza war in 2008 and many similar successful maneuvers in the 1990s: obstructing the peace process by using militants wearing peace jackets. But the more ominous development this flotilla is camouflaging is a real land fleet bringing missiles and advanced weapons to Hezbollah from Syria to the Bekaa Valley.
Over the past weeks reports have abounded about Iranian long-range missiles shipped via Syria to Hezbollah and satellite images have shown terror bases in the vicinity of Damascus growing under Baathist protection. As soon as the attention of the international community began to focus on the flow of strategic weapons to Hezbollah, the “brotherhood of regimes” unleashed the Gaza flotilla across the Mediterranean. Seasoned geopolitical experts would rationally link the move to create an incident off the coasts of Gaza with the move to equipping Hezbollah with lethal missiles.
In the end we’re looking at two flotillas, the maritime one in the south being only a decoy for the land fleet to achieve its goal of war preparations, in the north.
/**Dr Walid Phares is a professor of Global Strategies and the author of The Confrontation: Winning the War against Future Jihad. He is a contributor to FamilySecurityMatters.org.

Another Middle East War on the Horizon
By: Joshua Gleis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joshua-gleis/another-middle-east-war-o_b_596755.html
A new war in the Middle East is looming on the horizon--one that could create a fundamental shift in the region, and whose repercussions would be felt around the world. Israel, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran are all feverishly preparing for war, even while declaring an interest in maintaining the status quo. One need not look any farther than World War I to remember that millions of lives can be lost due to happenstance. It would not be the first time a region teeming with armies ignited in war despite a stated desire for peace.
Rhetoric is at a high, even for the loquacious Middle East. Iran's vice president recently threatened to "cut off Israel's feet", its parliamentary speaker promised a "final and decisive war", and its president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, added that the next conflict would be the "last war launched by the Zionists". Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has warned that Iran is provoking a war between Israel and Syria, while President Shimon Peres has declared the transfer of Syrian scud missiles to Hezbollah as unacceptable.
Syria's Bashar Assad recently chimed in as well, dismissing an Israeli offer made through Russian leader Dmitry Medvedev to cut ties with Iran and "resistance movements" in return for an Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights and a final peace agreement.
All of this is translating into real actions that could lead to war. The Israeli military is quietly preparing for another conflict, drilling its forces and increasing its surveillance and reconnaissance. Syrian and Hezbollah forces were put on alert along their southern borders with Israel as the Jewish state distributed gas masks to its citizens and prepared their bunkers for war. Weapons transfers continue as Hezbollah militants drill for a fight. At this point, any miscalculation can set off a war.
The most likely culprit for war this summer appears to be the continued transfer of advanced weaponry to Hezbollah by Syria and Iran. Hezbollah has tens of thousands of rockets in its arsenal, and has increased the number of projectiles that can reach nearly any point in Israel. So many, in fact, that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated last month, "We are at a point now where Hezbollah has far more rockets and missiles than most governments in the world".
Former Director of the CIA George Tenet described Hezbollah as follows: "An organization with capability and worldwide presence, it is al-Qaeda's equal, if not a far more capable organization... They are a notch above in many respects..."
No country is more aware of this than Israel, which remains the main target of Hezbollah's aggression. This week it was reported that Israel cancelled a planned strike on a Syrian-Hezbollah missile transfer at the last moment, likely under pressure from the United States.
To complicate matters further, Hezbollah today is a member of the Lebanese government, which has publicly backed its continued military buildup. This despite the fact that numerous UN Security Council resolutions and Lebanon's own Taif Accord call for the radical Shiite group and all other militias in the country to be disarmed.
In the last round of fighting with Hezbollah back in the summer of 2006, Israel was unable to quell the thousands of rockets fired at its northern towns and cities. It was, however, able to eliminate the group's medium range rocket and missile capabilities in the first hour or so of that war--an arsenal that threatened Tel Aviv and Israel's heartland. This time around, however, Hezbollah has significantly increased and spread out its longer range projectiles, storing some just over the border in Syria, seemingly out of harm's way.
Yet Hezbollah was not the only one to discover lessons from that war. Israel once again learned the hard way the dangers of retaliation versus preemption. While it had intelligence that Hezbollah was planning another kidnapping attack on its troops, it chose to wait for an attack before it struck out against Lebanon. Consequently, Hezbollah was permitted to attack on its own terms, ensuring a more positive outcome than was necessary.
 Israel had been loath to be seen as the aggressor back in 2006, and consequently suffered the consequences. Yet the truth is, regardless of the act or the response, many in the international community and particularly the Arab world, have a knee jerk reaction to Israeli activities that accuse the Jewish state of aggression and disproportionate response regardless of why it launched a military strike.
A similar lesson on preemption was first painfully discovered during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, when under pressure from the United States, Israel chose not to strike first as it had in the 1967 Six Day War. The differences between those two wars were startling.
In light of Israel's past experiences, along with the continued supplying of advanced weaponry to Hezbollah, the steady progress of Iran's nuclear and ballistic programs, and the increasing threats publicly made against Israel, the possibility of another war breaking out appears increasingly likely.
The question is whether Israel will succumb to US administration pressure to hold off on a preemptive strike, or whether it will decide it is time to strike first and lessen the blow of the Iranian-backed Hezbollah. Such a scenario might be the lesser of all evils for Israel, but it would still be devastating for all sides.
Such a war could see Israel launching attacks against Hezbollah weapons depots in Lebanon and Syria in response to the continued transfer of weapons to the Shiite Islamist group. Hezbollah has declared its desire to bring the next round of fighting into Israel this time--a scenario hitherto unheard of for Israelis and one that the Jewish state will make every effort to prevent.
 If Hezbollah fighters or weapons are positioned in Syria, that country might also be forced to join the war, at least symbolically. Iran has declared that in the case of war between Syria and Israel, it would come to the defense of its Syrian ally. In such a scenario, Israel might even find a further opportunity to launch a strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, although its effectiveness would be questionable.
Any way you slice it, this next war will not be a cakewalk for any side, which is why all parties continue to claim they do not want another fight. Yet the present situation is ultimately becoming untenable. If all of this reads like a fiction novel, let's remember the lessons of World War I. It is without question that all sides are feverishly preparing for war even if they do not necessarily want to fight one. Hezbollah has increasingly become an agent of Iran, with its Revolutionary Guards playing an important role in the decision-making body of the organization, known as its Shura Council. The terrorist group will never recognize Israel or make peace with it. And so the only questions left to ponder are who is going to ignite the next war in the Middle East, and when? Don't be surprised if Israel returns to the use of preemption to gain the upper hand and further its deterrence.
**Dr. Joshua Gleis is an international security consultant and political risk analyst. He received his PhD and MALD from the Fletcher School, Tufts University. His forthcoming book is entitled "Withdrawing Under Fire: Lessons Learned from Islamist Insurgencies" (Potomac Books, Inc., Fall 2010).

Report: Hamas Members Switch Loyalties to Al-Qaeda
by Maayana Miskin
Follow Israel news on and .
Thousands of former Hamas members have switched their loyalties, and now belong to a Salafi terrorist group inspired by Al-Qaeda, a Gaza terrorist told the Palestinian Authority-based Maan news agency.
The terrorist, Abu Al-Hareth, is the founder of Jund Ansar Allah, a Salafi group that has clashed with Hamas and challenges its control of Gaza. There are more than 11,000 Salafists in Gaza today, Hareth claimed, 70 percent of them former members of Hamas.
The once-Hamas, now Salafi terrorists are termed Jaljalat, he said. Jund Ansar Allah is one of the four groups comprising the Jaljalat; the others are Jund Allah, A-Taweed wa-Jihad, and the Army of Islam (Jamat Jaish al-Islam).
The Army of Islam was behind the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, who was later turned over to Hamas. It also kidnapped British journalist Alan Johnston, who was released unharmed after several weeks in captivity.
The Jaljalat is not officially linked to Al-Qaeda but is influenced by its worldview and models itself after Al-Qaeda cells in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, Hareth said. Its followers obey religious figures such as Shiekh Abu Mohammed al-Maqdisi, a senior figure in Al-Qaeda's Iraq branch.
Hamas and Al-Qaeda: From Cooperation to War
As the Shalit kidnapping demonstrates, the Salafi groups once worked alongside Hamas, and carried out “qualitative military attacks, during which a number of Israelis were killed,” Hareth said.
Recently, tensions have developed between Hamas and the Salafis. In 2009, Jund Ansar Allah declared an “Islamic emirate” in Gaza. Hamas declared war on the group and for hours a battle raged around a Salafi mosque in Gaza town of Rafiah. When the smoke cleared dozens were dead, including Salafi leader Abdel-Latif Moussa.
Following the battle, Al-Qaeda offshoots around the world accused Hamas of "abandoning Islam" and called for revenge.
Hamas continues to battle the Jaljalat, Hareth states, monitoring its members and often conducting arrests. The Jaljalat, for its part, accuses Hamas of failing to enforce Sharia (Islamic law) in Gaza.The Salafis and other rival terrorist groups have increasingly challenged Hamas rule in Gaza. Salafist groups have carried out dozens of bombings targeting restaurants, music stores, and other businesses deemed “un-Islamic,” while members of Fatah's Al-Aksa brigades have carried out attacks on Israel without coordinating with the Hamas leadership. (IsraelNationalNews.com)


The Free Gaza Flotilla
Reader comment on item: "Free Gaza" Flotilla Defeats the Israel Defense Forces
Submitted by Prof. Paul Eidelberg (Israel), Jun 1, 2010 at 08:09
The "Free Gaza" Flotilla was an act of psychological warfare intended to delegitimize Israel. Why this insidious warfare against the nation that gave mankind the Book of Books—the ultimate source of Western Civilization?
What underlies this attempt to delegitimize Israel? Precisely because the Bible refers to Israel as the "light of the nations," her enemies must make Israel appear as a veritable "black hole." Indeed, Israel's enemies make Israel look worse than all the nations, because that's the only way the nations can live with their own lies and viciousness made evident by the ethical monotheism. Israel is the perpetual gadfly of mankind; hence mankind's hatred of Jews.
N o wonder various Jew-haters call Israel an "apartheid state." No wonder Islam gets a free pass despite its apartheid religion—one that divides mankind into "infidels and "believers." Here is a case of inverse morality—calling good evil and evil good.
Let's be more precise. The criminals involved in the "Free Gaza" Flotilla are allies of Hamas, a despotic organization that represents authentic Islam. As a political-religious entity, Islam is diametrically opposed to what Israel strands for, namely, individual responsibility.
America was originally based on this Judaic concept. The preservation of individual responsibility requires the nation-state system. Indeed, the world-historical function of America is to prevent any nation from implementing an ideology that would undo the nation-state system—the system that enables a multiplicity of nations to pursue its own particularity consistent with international law or the Seven Noahide Laws of Universal Morality.
The one nation that most threatens the nation-state system is Islam. Islam is the nation — more than any other — that blames the "other" for its own failings. It is the one nation —more than any other — that rejects individual responsibility. This is why Islam hates the Jews more than another other people, for the Jew is the teacher of individual responsibility. Therein is THE heart of the so-called "clash of civilizations."
Individual responsibility is inescapably linked to the Judaic concept of man's creation in the image of God. Theologian George Weigel rightly says that Islam rejects this concept. But this suggests that what is ultimately at stake in the conflict between Islam and Israel is the "God issue." This is what "Free Gaza" Flotilla is really about: It's either the God of Israel or Allah.

IF THEY DON'T FOOL YOU THEY CAN'T DEFEAT YOU
By • Barry Rubin
Published in: Gloria Center - Global Research in International Affairs March 10, 2008
http://www.gloriacenter.org/index.asp?pname=submenus/articles/2008/rubin/3_10.asp
Radical forces in the Middle East have rewritten the international rulebook in a way designed so "they can't lose." That is, there's no easy response to their behavior and strategies.
What's even more worrisome is the widespread failure in the West even to realize this is happening. Hamas and Hizballah fire from among civilians and use civilian homes for military purposes; Syria or Iran deploy disinformation, radical regimes pretend moderation, and there are plenty of suckers to take the bait.
Extremism makes many believe that kind words and concessions can transform them; intransigence produces a response that if they won't give up we must do so.
Here are some new rules in which "we" represents such disparate forces as Hamas, Hizballah, Iran, Iraqi insurgents, al-Qaida, Syria, the Taliban, and others including radical Arab nationalists. These forces are not all alike or allied but do often follow a parallel set of rules quite different from how international affairs have generally been conducted.
We'll never give up. No matter what you do, we will continue fighting. No matter what you offer we will keep attacking you. Since you can't win you should give up.
We're indifferent to pressure you put on us. We will turn this pressure against you. Against us, deterrence does not exist; diplomacy does not convince. Neither does the carrot buy us off, nor does the stick make us yield. There are no solutions that can end the conflict. You cannot win militarily nor make peace through diplomacy.
If you set economic sanctions we'll say you are starving our people in an act of "collective punishment." Moreover, sanctions will cost you money and generate opposition among those who lose profits.
In response to military operations we'll attack your civilians. Casualties will undermine your internal support. We will try to force you to kill civilians accidentally. We won't care but will use this to persuade many that you are evil. Thus, we will simultaneously murder your civilians and get you condemned as human rights' violators.
If you try to isolate us we will use your own media and intellectuals against you. At times, we'll hint at moderation and make promises of change. We won't do so enough to alienate our own followers but enough to subvert yours. They will demand you engage us, which means you making concessions for nothing real in exchange.
Talking to our own people, we foment hatred and demonize you. Speaking to the West, we will accuse you of fomenting hatred. We will hypocritically turn against you all the concepts you developed: racism, imperialism, failure to understand the "other," and so on. These, of course, are our ideas but your feelings of guilt, ignorance about us, and indifference to ideology will make you not notice that fact.
We will claim to be victims and "underdogs." Because you are the stronger and more "advanced" that means you are the villains. We're not held responsible for our deeds or expected to live up to the same standards. There is no shortage of, to quote Lenin, "useful idiots" who will echo our propaganda.
Since our societies are weak, undemocratic, and have few real moderates, you will have to make deals with phoney moderates and dictatorial regimes weakened by corruption and incompetence.
Even the less radical regimes, often our immediate adversaries, partly play into our hands. Due to popular pressure--plus their desire to mobilize support and distract attention from their own shortcomings--they trumpet Arab and Islamic solidarity. They denounce the West, blame all problems on Israel, and revile America, even as they accept your aid. They glorify interpretations of Islam not too far from ours. They cheer Iraqi insurgents, Hizballah, and Hamas. They don't struggle against Iran getting nuclear weapons. They lay the basis for our mass support and recruits, as Lenin said selling us the rope to hang them as well as you.
There's no diplomatic solution for you, though you yearn to find one. There's no military solution for you, whether you try that or not. You love life, we love death; you are divided, we are united; you want to get back to material satisfaction, we are dedicated revolutionaries. We will outlast you.
Finally, our greatest weapon is that you truly don't understand all the points made above. You are taught, informed, and often led by people who simply don't comprehend what an alternative, highly ideological, revolutionary worldview means. In effect, we will try, and often succeed, toturn your "best and brightest" into the worst and dimmest who think you can persuade us, blame you for the conflicts, or expect that we will alter our course, and we will use those mistakes against you.
The above analysis seems pessimistic but actually is the opposite. Most of this strategy's power is based on spreading illusions, depending on gullibility. Much of the rest relies on their enemies' psychological weaknesses. In a sustained conflict, the radicals' technological and organizational weaknesses, along with their mistaken assessments and unrealistic ideology, will bring inevitable defeat. They will lose even if they never surrender. They can kill people but not overcome societies determined to grow, prosper, and survive. The keys to a successful response are steadfastness and understanding. To paraphrase Francis Bacon and Franklin Roosevelt, there is nothing to fear but fear--and gullibility--itself.

Ban: Israel Must lift Gaza Blockade Immediately
Naharnet/U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon demanded that Israel lift its blockade of the Gaza Strip immediately in the wake of its deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla.
Speaking on his return from visits to Brazil, Malawi and Uganda, Ban told reporters that the underlying problem behind Monday's tragedy was the long-running, crippling Israeli siege of the tiny Palestinian coastal enclave, which he described as "counter-productive, unsustainable and wrong."
The U.N. secretary-general said Israeli authorities must provide a "full and detailed account" of the commando raid on six ships that tried to break the Gaza siege to deliver some 10,000 tons of supplies. Israeli commandos boarded one of the aid ships in a pre-dawn raid that left at least nine passengers -- including four Turks -- dead. Hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists were also arrested. The Israeli army said the commandos resorted to force after they were attacked with sticks and stabbed as soon as they landed on deck.
Organizers of the so-called "Freedom Flotilla" denied the military's account, saying the soldiers began firing as soon as they landed.
Ban said he was looking at "various options" to conduct a "prompt, credible, impartial and transparent" investigation of the incident, as called for by the U.N. Security Council.
Earlier, the Geneva-based U.N. Human Rights Council set up an independent international investigation into the Israeli raid.
"Everything must be done to prevent another incident of this kind," the U.N. boss said. "All concerned should act with a sense of care and responsibility, and in accordance with international law." Stressing the need "to avoid provocations," Ban said the world body raised its concerns with international partners and Israeli authorities.
In recent months, Ban has consistently urged Israel to lift the blockade and allow the United Nations and other humanitarian relief supplies into Gaza.
"If this had been done, this tragedy would have been avoided," he noted.
The diplomatic Quartet seeking to bring about Middle East peace -- The European Union, Russia, the United Nations and the United States -- has stressed the need "to fundamentally improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza," according to Ban. "In the meantime, subject to the consent of donors and without any strings attached, we will do our part so that aid from the convoy reaches its destination, as called for by the Security Council," Ban said. "We encourage all parties to be flexible to enable this to happen."
He also underscored the urgency to press on with U.S.-brokered indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinians to reach a peace settlement.
Israel is deporting more than 600 foreign activists whose accounts of the raid contradicted Israeli reports that its soldiers acted in self-defense.
The Jewish state rushed to deport the activists after Turkey piled up pressure via the United States and warned of fresh measures against Israel, threatening to further deepen the crisis between the once-close allies. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu meanwhile insisted the Israeli blockade was key in preventing weapons from reaching Gaza. "Hamas continues to arm itself and Iran continues to transfer weapons to Hamas," the premier said. The Jewish state withdrew from Gaza in 2005, but maintained control of all the crossings, with the exception of the Rafah border crossing, which is now policed by Egypt.(AFP) Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 07:00

Makari says Syria does not deal with Lebanon as independent country
June 3, 2010 /Deputy Speaker Farid Makari told Akhbar al-Yom news agency on Thursday that despite the improvement of Lebanese-Syrian relations, Damascus does not deal with Lebanon as an independent country. Makari said that he supported the building of normal relations between Beirut and Damascus, but he said he was not satisfied with the means to do it.
“So far, it seems Hariri is building good relations internationally, regionally and at the Arab level,” Makari said. “With regard to relations with Damascus, my conviction does not change… There is no equality in dealings.”-NOW Lebanon

Turkey says ties with Israel will never be the same
June 3, 2010 /Turkey's ties with Israel suffered irreparable damage and will never be the same after the deadly raid on aid ships bound for Gaza, Turkish President Abdullah Gul said on Thursday. Gul added that Monday's attack by Israeli forces, in which eight Turks and a US national of Turkish origin were killed, "is not an issue that can be forgotten... or be covered up."
-AFP/NOW Lebanon

Bassil calls on Baroud to disqualify LADE, CLOE
June 3, 2010 /Energy Minister Gebran Bassil issued a statement on Thursday calling on Interior Minister Ziad Baroud to disqualify as election observers the Lebanese Association for Democratic Elections (LADE) and the Coalition for Election Observation (CLOE) after the organizations accused Bassil of not separating his role as a minister from his position as a Free Patriotic Movement official during Sunday’s municipal and mukhtar elections in Batroun. The CLOE also said that Bassil used the offices of his ministry for the FPM’s electoral efforts.
Bassil called on Baroud to investigate the organizations regarding the remarks they made against him. -NOW Lebanon

Rahme: Geagea is wrong; supporting the Resistance is a national duty
June 3, 2010 /Free and United Lebanon bloc MP Emile Rahme told OTV on Thursday that supporting the Resistance is a national duty, adding that Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea “is wrong to estimate matters in light of what Israel [is going through],” a reference to the Monday Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla that spurred international fury.
This comes after Geagea said on Wednesday that Hezbollah’s increasing power does not strengthen Lebanon, adding that the international community will side with Israel in case of any possible upcoming confrontation between Tel Aviv and Hezbollah. “It is within the interests of the Christians to support the Resistance,” Rahme said.
He also described as pointless the jail sentences handed down last month by an Egyptian state security court to 26 defendants found guilty of belonging to a Hezbollah cell discovered last year in the Sinai. Twenty-two defendants received jail terms of between six months and 15 years, despite calls from prosecutors for the death penalty to be imposed. Four defendants remain at large, including the alleged head of the Hezbollah cell, Lebanese national Mohammad Qabalan, all of whom received life sentences.
-NOW Lebanon

Arab League Meeting Ends with Pledge to 'Break' Gaza Siege
Naharnet/Arab League foreign ministers reached a decision following a five-hour meeting to break the Gaza siege "by all means."The decision was announced at daybreak Thursday by Arab League chief Amr Moussa at the end of an emergency meeting of the League in Cairo to discuss Israel's deadly raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla. Moussa said the meeting, which was attended by 12 Arab League FMs, ended with "strong condemnation of this aggression" which left nine activists killed. The League also slammed the Israeli attack as a "serious and flagrant violation of international law." "The Council adopted a package of measures and decisions, on top of which challenging and breaking the Israeli siege imposed on the Gaza Strip immediately and by all means," Moussa told a news conference. He said Arab Forign Ministers also agreed to take up the issue "in full coordination with Turkey" to the U.N. Security Council on Thursday "in order to obtain a binding decision that would commit Israel to end its illegal siege of Gaza immediately." Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 08:09

Reports: Suleiman-Assad Summit in Damascus Next Week
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman has reportedly agreed to hold a summit with Syrian President Bashar Assad next week following a telephone conversation between the two leaders on Wednesday. Media reports said preparations are underway to hold the talks in Damascus. On Sunday, press reports quoted well-informed Syrian sources as saying that Suleiman was expected to visit Syria in the coming days ahead of a meeting for the Higher Lebanese-Syrian Council scheduled for June. During their telephone conversation, Suleiman and Assad discussed the repercussions of Israel's attack on the Freedom Fleet and bilateral ties. Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 08:42

Lebanese Aid Ship Activists Arrive to Hero's Welcome after their Release by Israel
Naharnet/Four Lebanese activists detained during an Israeli raid on a Gaza-bound humanitarian aid arrived at the Lebanese border to a hero's welcome. A huge crowd, waving the Lebanese, Palestinian and Turkish flags threw rice and flowers as Abbas Nasser, Hussein Shukur, Andre Abi Khalil and Hani Suleiman crossed the border at Naqoura around 10:30 pm Wednesday. Representatives of President Michel Suleiman, Prime Minister Saad Hariri and Speaker Nabih Berri as well as Hizbullah MPs were also present.
The men, looking tired, were handed over by Israel to the International Committee of the Red Cross late Wednesday. Suleiman, who headed the Lebanese mission to the Freedom Fleet, suffered a gunshot wound to his foot. He arrived at Naqoura in an ambulance. "We hear a lot about Israeli brutality, but when you see it close up it's a different story," said Nasser, who works as a news reporter for Al-Jazeera satellite channel. He told reporters that he saw "hundreds of soldiers armed to the teeth." Abi Khalil is Jazeera's photographer.
"I was able to tell the Zionists face to face that 'you murdered my children,'" said Shukur whose wife and children were killed in an Israeli air raid during the summer 2006 war on Lebanon.
An-Nahar newspaper said a fifth Lebanese activist, Nabil Hallak, will be handed over to the Irish embassy in Tel Aviv, given that he holds both the Lebanese and Irish nationalities.
Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 09:12

Suleiman, Abbas Call for Establishment of Commission to Probe Israeli Attack
Naharnet/President Michel Suleiman held a telephone conversation with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday and the two leaders stressed the need to lift the siege off Gaza and establish a committee to investigate the Israeli attack on the Freedom Fleet.
Suleiman and Abbas also agreed it was important for the Palestinian side to coordinate with the Lebanese ambassador in New York because Lebanon represents the Arab group at the U.N. A Baabda palace statement said the two presidents discussed latest international and Arab resolutions on the issue. Beirut, 03 Jun 10, 14:03

Iran and the STL frame Lebanon’s summer
By: Jean-Luc Vannier,
June 3, 2010
Now Lebanon
The Lebanese municipal elections, which took place over several Sundays in May, failed to enlist the people’s enthusiasm. The high abstention rate, especially in the capital, where Christian votes symbolize the confrontation between the March 14 coalition and the pro-Syrian March 8 forces, proved the voters’ disavowal of elections, which – by and large – depict Lebanon under the worst light: a country of exacerbated clientelism and local mismatches that strive to preserve the interests of major aristocratic families. The Lebanese can hardly seem to remember the keen interest in the parliamentary elections of June 2009, which were theoretically a victory, even though it was stolen from them in practice due to the issue of Hezbollah’s weapons.
June: A “risky timeframe”
The prospect of a summer season with a record number of European tourists, according to predictions, is the only thought that raises people’s spirits in Lebanon, but only relatively so. The summer of 2010 seems already darkened by ominous clouds, spelling serious danger at best. An Israeli expert on security issues and a source close to Hezbollah both agreed that the Security Council meeting set to be held in June at the latest to discuss sanctions on Iran signals a “risky timeframe”. Whether in June or at a subsequent date, Hezbollah is gearing up for an inevitable war with Israel. “One month, six months or two years, it doesn’t matter,” says a Hezbollah supporter who believes adamantly that “the confrontation will extend into Israel this time around.” When asked whether they do not fear bombings, another party supporter boasts: “We have entire towns underground with tunnels connecting them to each other.” The aforementioned supporter asserts yet again: Following the renewal of the alliance between Syria, Iran and Hezbollah during Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s recent visit to Damascus, it is being said that “the Islamic Republic of Iran will not remain inactive.” It is useless to hope for disengaging the mighty Syrian neighbor from its Iranian protector, knowing that this assertion is meant primarily for the French diplomacy. Furthermore, this visit allowed the resolution of any lingering murkiness and mistrust between Hezbollah and Alawi leaders following Imad Mugniyah’s assassination.
On this side of the Litani, the Israeli strategy is being analyzed with the same prevailing assurance. According to Lebanese analyses, Israel is locked in a race against time and, thus, alternately uses provocations and reassuring statements. It also seems to be unsure about the outcome of a confrontation during which it would try to make the Lebanese-Syrian border watertight by forcing the international community to deploy UN troops along this border in exchange for a cessation of hostilities. Being convinced at the same time of Iran’s involvement and support for the Shia militia, Tel Aviv would be willing to bet on a conflict that would inevitably entail US support and military intervention, something which – according to the abovementioned source – Israel has failed to gain so far in times of peace.
A new “Blue Line”?
Even though Hezbollah tirelessly asserts that war is not about to break out, the party’s leadership still sent a circular to all headmasters of the Al-Hoda schools, which are financed by the party and reportedly teach the children of many party leaders, asking them to have the curriculum completed by the end of May, a full month before the ordinary end of the school year. Should this really be a cause for alarm? As to the sensitive issue of new missiles that were delivered to the pro-Iranian group, security officials – even within the United Nations – are now almost certain that such deliveries have indeed taken place. Some quote the inhabitants of Machghara, the most important town in the West Bekaa on the Litani’s right bank between the border crossing of Chtaura and the South, as saying discreetly that huge lorries roam the countryside at night under cover of the darkness resulting from power cuts.
In the same spirit, UNIFIL patrols are coming under repeated attacks launched by townsfolk. Western powers are also uncomfortable about LAF officials’ recent interpretation of the “Blue Line” ten years after it was made official following Israel’s withdrawal from South Lebanon. On the field, Lebanese officers make a difference between a “first Blue Line” between Naqoura and the Wazzani on the one hand and, on the other, a second such line from the Wazzani to the east along the Syrian border. The LAF considers this second zone “occupied territory” and refuses to quell – or even contain – the mounting civilian protests. This drove UNIFIL officials to wonder whether some Lebanese authorities do not have a “hidden agenda.” The situation was tense enough to call for a lightning visit by Egypt’s Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheit, who seemingly came to Beirut on April 24 in an attempt to ask his Lebanese interlocutors to “reason with Hezbollah.” According to a high-ranking Shia official from the Amal Movement, it would be a waste of time since “Hezbollah’s leaders are convinced of the rightfulness of their actions” and “no one in Lebanon – not even [Prime Minister] Saad Hariri – can take any action against them.”
Pressure from Turkey
Druze leader Walid Jumblatt undoubtedly understood this and derived lessons from the aftermath of the Choueifat battle that pitted his supporters against Hezbollah’s in May 2008. Well before the parliamentary elections of June 2009, Walid Bey had initiated consultations aiming for a rapprochement with the Shia militia. Since then, he merely confirmed this trend by announcing his withdrawal from the March 14 coalition led by Saad Hariri, even if this change of alliances is far from being unanimously approved by his supporters. His clearly-hammered concern about “protecting his community” has not managed to silence those criticizing him. They certainly still respect their charismatic leader, but, as a taxi driver from Aley put it in his own words: “Yes to the Lebanese army, no to Hezbollah.”
While this might be yet another indirect consequence of Hezbollah’s rising influence, Turkey is also playing from now on an explicit role in the Lebanese “big game”. In fact, Ankara, for the first time, exerted pressure on the authorities in Beirut to prevent any Lebanese officials from attending the commemorations of the Armenian genocide on April 24 in Antelias (the seat of the Armenian Church) or in the Bourj Hammoud football stadium, where 60,000 people were assembled. This maneuver was denounced by Tashnaq official and Armenian MP for the Metn district Hagop Pakradounian, who said to Lebanese officials: “Beware of hurting the Armenians’ dignity.” Moreover, rumor has it that Turkey’s activism in Lebanon does not stop here, as Ankara has been financing for many years “the reinsertion of Sufi brotherhoods thanks to influential tribes that settled in the country’s north.” This goes without mentioning the “construction of schools for Sunnis of Turkish origin in the Baalbek area.” Turkey is also building the necessary ties with Shia families in the South by handing out a grant for building a football stadium. According to a US Embassy diplomat in Beirut, the United States “is favorable to these Turkish initiatives,” which aim to develop a certain level of protection against the Shia, a guarantee that Egypt or Saudi Arabia cannot offer. For his part, Antranik Dakessian asserts that “consensual democracy is being called into question, and this worries the Armenian community.” According to the Haigazian University chancellor, this community is undergoing profound changes manifested in “one of the lowest birth rates compared to the remaining communities in Lebanon”, in addition to a tendency to become poorer. “Only one-third of Armenians are economically self-sufficient,” he says, “while 30% live on financial support from abroad, and the remaining one-third clearly live well below the poverty line.”
Is the STL to issue an indictment in the autumn?
Even if nothing unsettles the quietness of Lebanon’s summer, the autumn might bring in some turbulence. Despite its feared discretion, several security sources said the Special Tribunal for Lebanon will make the headlines in the fall. The office of the STL prosecutor has considerably stepped up its investigations, which recently extended to the Directorate General of General Security despite the reluctance of its director, who, despite his renowned closeness to Hezbollah, was forced to yield to the state prosecutor’s order. Without revealing the same fingerprints they wanted to check, investigators thus had free access to the alphabetical folders of the Lebanese intelligence services central organism. At the same time, other investigators made progress on the identity of people who bought metal objects, pieces of which were found scattered around the scene of the explosion that killed former PM Rafik Hariri and his companions. In the case of Marwan Hamadeh, a former minister close to Walid Jumblatt who was wounded in an assassination attempt in 2004, sources in Beirut assert that the STL prosecutor already has all the judicial leads in hand.
The Lebanese justice minister predicted that the procedures may be spread out in time in order to avert any civil unrest (see here ). Still, UN officials expect the STL to issue an indictment, which would publish in full the names of all those suspected of involvement in the assassination of former PM Rafik Hariri in February 2005. Those who were wondering about the STL’s independence and criticized its slow pace now seem to fear the effects of its dynamics and the consequences of its determination.
The French version of this piece was previously published inL’Alliance Géostratégique.

Four Lebanese flotilla passengers return home
By Wassim Mroueh and Mohammed Zaatari
Daily Star staff
Thursday, June 03, 2010
BEIRUT: Four Lebanese passengers of an aid fleet bound for Gaza were released by Israeli authorities on Wednesday.
Lebanese activists Hussein Shukor, Hani Sleiman and Al-Jazeera journalists Abbas Nasser and Andre Abou Khalil entered the Lebanese territories via the Naqoura border crossing.
On Sunday night, Israel’s navy stopped six ships dubbed “The Freedom Fleet” ferrying 700 people and 10,000 tons of supplies toward Gaza strip. A Turkish vessel was attacked by Israeli commandos, killing at least nine activists. The captured vessels were escorted into Israel’s port of Ashdod.
The passengers who came from different states are being deported by Israeli authorities. Six Lebanese passengers were aboard the “Freedom Fleet.”
Issam Zaatar, a carrier of a Lebanese-Belgian dual nationality, had left Israel for Brussels Tuesday morning.
Reports said Nabil Hallak, a Lebanese who holds an Irish passport will be deported by the Israeli authorities to Ireland.
Nasser, meanwhile, has been working for Al-Jazeera television since 2004.
The 34-year-old journalist has served in Al-Manar and Al-Alam TV stations along with Bahrain radio station.
As for 61-year-old Hani Sleiman, the lawyer was injured during the Israeli attack on the Turkish ship. He was also among the passengers of the “Lebanese Brotherhood” vessel that tried to break the Israeli siege on Gaza in February 2009.
The ship was held by the Israeli authorities and its passengers deported to their countries. Sleiman occupied senior posts in the Baath Party between 1966 and 1974 and has joined a number of associations. Sleiman is married and has three children.
Hussein Shukor lost his wife and four children when his home was hit by Israeli jets in 2006 summer Israeli war against Lebanon.
He also planned to join the “Lebanese Brotherhood” vessel but failed to do so.
Israel’s step drew waves of criticism from many states and international organizations.
Turkish Premier Tayyip Erdogan urged the immediate lifting of “the inhumane embargo on Gaza” on Tuesday.
“Israel’s behavior should definitely, definitely be punished,” Erdogan told a meeting of his parliamentary deputies, adding: “The time has come for the international community to say enough.”
Meanwhile, rallies protesting the Israeli storming of the “Freedom Fleet” continued in Beirut on Wednesday.
A sit-in was held by various Lebanese political parties along with Palestinian factions near the ESCWA headquarters in downtown Beirut.
The gathering was called by head of Progressive Socialist Party (PSP) Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt.
The sit-in was attended by members of March 8 and March 14 camps, two rival political groups.
Participants in the sit-in decided to forward petitions conveying their united stance against the aggression to United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Arab League Chief Amr Moussa and ambassadors of member states in the Security Council.
PSP official Sharif Fayyad outlined to the crowds the content of a petition that was handed to UN Media Center Director Bahaa Al-Qousi. The letter slammed “Israeli aggressiveness” calling it a “natural product of the racist Zionist culture.”
The demonstrators urged the Security Council to deter the ongoing Israeli aggression against civilians that “didn’t spare volunteers from different races trying to deliver aid to Palestinians besieged by Israel.”
They also called upon the Security Council to lift of the blockade on Gaza, impose sanctions on Israel and force it to pay compensations for the “humane and social” disasters it provoked.
Also, around 5,000 individuals gathered Wednesday afternoon near Fatima gate in the border village of Kfar- Kila protesting Israel’s aggression on Gaza’s aid fleet.
The Hizbullah-arranged gathering was attended by the party’s MP Ali Fayyad and Baaath Party MP Qassem Hashem along with a number of local figures.
Reports said the demonstrators remained near the Israeli-Lebanese borders until the Lebanese passengers were released.

Whither America after the Gaza fiasco?
By Michael Young
Daily Star/Thursday, June 03, 2010
As Israel stumbles to limit the fallout from its foolish, violent handling of the Gaza flotilla incident, a larger question is what the fiasco means for the United States in the Middle East. Beyond the negative impact on peace negotiations, Washington must determine how to defend its interests amid the current transmutations in the region.
The “peace process” is very nearly dead. It’s almost impossible to imagine that Israelis and Palestinians will conclude a settlement in the foreseeable future, and the problem goes beyond the negotiators on each side. The obstacles are structural: There is no will or trust in Israel to make the concessions a settlement requires, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not jeopardize his coalition to pursue an uncertain peace. And Hamas has the ability to undermine any agreement with Israel reached by the Palestinian Authority, while the Arab states are too bankrupt politically to prevent this.
Efforts by the Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad, to establish the foundations of a state are laudable, but frail. However, the Israelis cannot and will not see that the success of his endeavor would help define a more promising outlook for them. Today, Israel is devoid of any vision, of any sense of how the country might integrate into the Middle East. And across the aisle is a Palestinian partner who, unless it can produce an advantageous end-game soon, will see its standing disintegrate to the advantage of Hamas and its allies.
As the United States watches this shipwreck, it seems helpless to prevent it and has no backup plan to defend its own aims in the region. Palestinian-Israeli peace is desirable, and President Barack Obama was right to explore ways to restart negotiations; but now is the time to reassess, events in recent days bringing home the reason why. What is Obama’s Plan B? Israel is becoming more isolated internationally by the day; America’s Arab allies, particularly Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are weaker than ever; and even the United States itself is losing its primacy in the Middle East by pursuing an elusive victory in Afghanistan and abandoning a rare success in Iraq.
If one had to wager on the shape of the region in the coming years, it would be reasonable to put money on America’s enemies. Iran, Syria, armed Islamist groups such as Hizbullah and Hamas, even American allies such as Turkey that have chosen to fundamentally overhaul their connection with Washington and Israel, are showing themselves to be far more adept at playing to Middle Eastern vicissitudes than the Obama administration. A new regional order is taking shape, and Washington is still using weapons from the old order.
One of those weapons, the peace process, is almost worthless. Engagement of Iran and Syria, for a moment Barack Obama’s illusory silver bullet, has backfired. The cretinous American obsession with being loved by Arabs and Muslims, expressed through the president’s Ankara and Cairo speeches, has prompted no discernible response. And even international cooperation to contain Iran and its nuclear program has, until now, only bought Tehran more time.
So what is Washington to do? For starters, it has to reach realistic conclusions about where Palestinian-Israeli negotiations are heading. If a settlement is a strategic imperative, then Obama must use all the tools at his disposal to bring about an agreement, including withholding credit guarantees to Israel. But if he won’t do so (and such a step would probably just harden Israeli rejection of American conditions while provoking outrage in Congress), then it’s time to put peace negotiations on the backburner and focus on consolidating American power elsewhere to address the main threat to the status quo in the Middle East: the emergence of a nuclear Iran.
And the only conceivable way of doing that is to reevaluate the relationship with Iraq and develop a strategic relationship with Baghdad that takes priority over Washington’s ties with its other Arab allies. This does not mean Obama will need to discontinue the American military withdrawal from Iraq. On the contrary. The point is to build up an alliance with an Iraq not dependant on the United States, that can defend itself against Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia, that is also pluralistic and can put to good use its vast oil wealth. Such an ally, located at the heart of the Middle East, would be valuable to Washington and represent the only serious Arab counterweight to Iran.
For some reason this proposal is considered bizarre for being so different from what we have today. Yet it is no more bizarre than the Syrian decision to develop a strategic relationship with Iran against its Arab brethren; or than Turkey’s determination to strengthen its regional bona fides by becoming a loud defender of the Palestinian cause and a harsh critic of Israel – moves partly designed by the ruling AKP party to place its domestic Turkish rivals, above all the army (the principal guardian of the Israel affiliation), on the defensive. What is so peculiar about grasping that regional dynamics are shifting, therefore that Washington must reinvent itself in the Middle East?
The United States must also prepare to abandon Afghanistan. Obama’s “right war” is every day proving to be a wrongheaded war, an expensive, all-consuming conflict that is distracting Washington from the more important task of neutralizing Iran’s expanding power in the Gulf and the Levant; worse, a conflict that Iran can use to bleed the United States in defense of its objectives in those regions.
The American approach to the Middle East, based as it is on familiar, static policies that have failed to accommodate to new regional forces, is only marginalizing Washington. Barack Obama the much-vaunted visionary is showing himself to be perilously myopic.
*Michael Young is opinion editor of THE DAILY STAR. His “The Ghosts of Martyrs Square: An Eyewitness Account of Lebanon’s Life Struggle” (Simon & Schuster) has just been published.

Kassir's legacy and reform
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Editorial/Daily Star
The Samir Kassir Foundation has honored the work of local journalists this week, and official Lebanon is preparing itself for the post-municipal election phase of promised political reform.
What’s the connection? The name Samir Kassir, naturally, evokes the March 14 movement, and the journalist was assassinated five years ago this week. His SKeyes Foundation happens to be one of the tangible achievements of the March 14 movement. The group’s activities, in monitoring and encouraging the local and Arab media, are what remain with us as Kassir’s legacy. Enriching our community is what Kassir has left us to carry out, and the organization should be commended for continuing on this path.
Of course, the difficulty of locating and identifying other tangible achievements of the intifada of 2005, for our society and our polity, is a worrying sign.
March 14 has given us much when it comes to principles, and rhetoric, but little in the way of institution-building. There are the periodic meetings of the movement, but few concrete initiatives, just talking points, recommendations and demands that the government do something, even though the group is part of the government. What March 14 has lacked is a concrete plan of action, one that addresses what most Lebanese are concerned about: their jobs, their futures and the state of their country’s basic services. Not regional axes and overarching slogans. A recent report by the International Crisis Group says that Prime Minister Saad Hariri and his Future movement must bridge the sectarian divides that have impeded successful national political action. However, tellingly, the ICG also says that Future must move away from traditional patron-client relations and cronyism, to shore up its standing with its followers and the public.
A visiting economic luminary, in the form of Mark Mobius, recently advised Lebanese leaders to reduce the country’s massive debt – we’re already aware of the need to focus on investment in productive enterprises, and job creation. Coming off a disappointing parliamentary election round in 2009, and the even more sour municipal polls of last month, the Lebanese public is certainly in need of tangible action on political reform and economic growth. People have been committed to their respective political camps, such as the parliamentary majority and minority, but have received no cohesive, forward-thinking plans, and practical steps for implementation. Samir Kassir was an enthusiastic proponent of democratization as one approach to reform. Today, the foundation bearing his name is pursuing a defined goal: promoting the cause of investigative journalism in the Middle East.
Like SKeyes, our political class and state officials should take practical steps to promote the reform they champion – at some point in time, we will be experiencing their legacy as well.

6. Al-Qaeda's Number 3 Killed in US Air Strike
by Hana Levi Julian/Arutz Sheva
The third highest commander in the international Al-Qaeda terrorist organization is reported dead following a missile attack by United States armed forces.
Sheikh Said al-Masri – whose nom de guerre was Mustafa Abu al-Yazid – was killed last week along with his wife, three daughters and a grandchild as well as others, according to a report posted Tuesday on the group's Internet web site.
Al-Masri was Al-Qaeda's top commander in Afghanistan and was one of the founders of the terrorist group. If his death is confirmed, it would make him the top Al-Qaeda leader to be assassinated in the past 18 months, and the first important kill by the Obama administration.
It is believed the Egyptian-born terrorist commander was killed in an air strike by a CIA drone on a terrorist compound in one of the tribal areas along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The reports that his family were killed as well seem to point to the presence of civilians at the compound.
The 55-year-old Al-Masri was considered to be the fiscal “executive” who financed Al-Qaeda's “9/11” attack on New York and Washington in 2001 and provided day-to-day operational planning for the group.
He also provided the funds for a bombing attack on the New York subway system that was thwarted by local police officers. The attack, which targeted Grand Central Station and Times Square subway trains during rush-hour traffic, was timed to strike just days after the eighth anniversary of the September 11 terror destruction of the World Trade Center in New York.
The principal suspect in the foiled bombing, Najibullah Zazi, pleaded guilty and turned state's witness, helping prosecutors trace the plot back to Pakistan where he and several friends received terrorist training in 2008. Zazi, a Colorado airport van driver linked to an Afghanistan-born Muslim cleric, admitted he intended to attack the subway in retaliation for U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan.

Top US Democrats: 'Israel Has Right to Defend Itself'
by Hana Levi Julian
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went on the offensive Wednesday to defend Israel's right to protect its territorial waters.
Biden told reporters on Wednesday that Israel was within its legal rights in stopping the Turkey-sponsored six-ship flotilla from violating its territorial waters and breaking its naval embargo on Gaza.
Biden said during an interview on the “Charlie Rose” television program, “You can argue whether Israel should have dropped people onto that ship or not, and the – but the truth of the matter is, Israel has a right to know... whether or not arms are being smuggled in.”
Pelosi told reporters, “I know that blockades have consequences. And, again, we all saw this in real time because everyone has a camera, and I think that people make a case on either side as to who was provocative and who was not. But the fact is, this is a terribly regrettable situation. I regret the loss of life first and foremost,” she said, “and again call for a credible and transparent investigation to find out how this came to be.”
Pelosi refused to be drawn into the blame game, and emphasized that “Israel is our friend. I think with Israel we have a very close friendship, and to have a democratic Jewish state in that region is something that has been a goal of our foreign policy. It is something that is based on our national security interest; it is about us as much – even more – than it is about them. We all – many of us here – are striving for a two-state solution,” she added, “but it has to be a solution where there is security for both sides.”
Lieberman: Blockade Removal in Exchange for Shalit Visits
Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman commented Thursday that Israel might consider further lifting the blockade if Hamas agrees to allow monthly visits to kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit.
Shalit has been held hostage by Hamas terrorists since he was abducted by Hamas terrorists in a deadly cross-border raid by near the Kerem Shalom crossing on June 25, 2006. His condition and whereabouts remain unknown.

Netanyahu: This was No Love Boat
by Gil Ronen/Arutz Sheva
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the Israeli public on live television at 8:00 p.m. Israel time, regarding the attempt by a terror-sympathizers' flotilla to break the blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza.
"This was no Love Boat,” he said. “This was a boat of hatred. It was a terror-supporting flotilla”
"The state of Israel faces an international campaign of hypocrisy,” Netanyahu said. “This is not the first time. Two years ago, we operated against the missiles that Hamas fired against Israel. Hamas fired at civilians and hid behind civilians. The IDF operated against Hamas in an effort to avoid hitting innocent civilians. Despite this, the UN accused Israel of war crimes and regretfully, I must say that this is what is happening now too."
"Hamas continues to arm, Iran continues to smuggle weapons into Gaza. The previous [Israeli] government placed a military blockade on Gaza to prevent weapon smuggling to Hamas. The purpose of the flotilla was to break the naval blockade of Gaza. If the blockade had been broken, this flotilla would have been followed by hundreds of ships. The amount of weapons that can be brought in by boat is far greater than what is brought in through the smuggling tunnels. An endless amount of weaponry can be brought in. It is our right and duty to inspect every ship that tries to reach Gaza, to remove the weapons and let the rest of the cargo enter.”
If Gaza turns into an Iranian port, Netanyahu said, other countries beside Israel will be threatened.
The naval commandos were attacked with knives and clubs and thrown off the deck, he said. “Their weapons were snatched and they were shot. There was an attempt to lynch IDF soldiers here. These are not peace activists. They are violent terror activists.”

Confirmed Hamas Leader Among Flotilla 'Activists'
by Hana Levi Julian/Arutz Sheva
A confirmed terrorist leader was among the Gaza flotilla extremists aboard the Mavi Marmara on Monday, holding a Dutch passport.
Amin Abu Rashed, 43, was among the militants arrested on the Turkish vessel following the vicious attack on Israeli Naval commandos who boarded the ship. The Palestinian Authority Arab holds a Dutch passport and operates out of Rotterdam as the leader of the Hamas terrorist network in the Netherlands. He has presented himself to Dutch media and others as a “human rights activist.”
According to a report posted Tuesday on the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report, Abu Rashed – also known as Amin Abu Ibrahim – was “one of the chief organizers of the Gaza flotilla.”
The six-ship flotilla, sponsored largely by Turkey, refused to change course despite repeated Israeli requests to head for Ashdod port rather than violate an embargo on the Hamas terrorist-run Gaza region. In Ashdod, Israel promised to off-load the ships' cargo, inspect it for contraband and then deliver all legal humanitarian aid to Gaza via the land crossings – but the ships refused to comply, vowing instead to “reach Gaza or martyrdom.”
The Muslim report added that Rashed and 29-year-old Dutch anthropologist Anne de Jong were offered a fast-track deportation procedure, “but refused because they [said they] want to complete their mission.” Both refused to sign the State of Israel declaration of expulsion that would have allowed them to go free.
Abu Rashed's name has previously come up in a document presented as evidence in the United States government's prosecution of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation charity organization – a group that was funneling money to Hamas.
Global jihadists were deeply involved in the flotilla incident in other ways. Approximately 40 of those arrested on the Mavi Marmara had no identification, and many were found to be carrying thousands of dollars in cash in their pockets – the same amount for each. Israeli officials said they appeared to be mercenaries, possibly linked to Al-Qaeda, who had received their remuneration just before boarding the vessel.
IDF video evidence shows the group splitting up into teams and sending the rest of the passengers below decks, while making preparations for the ambush of the Israeli Naval commandos.
According to the GMB Daily Report, “Previous posts have described the heavy participation of the Global Muslim Brotherhood in the Gaza flotilla, the Muslim Brotherhood background of the Al Jazeera journalist reporting from the Turkish ship involved in the confrontation, and the intent of the Global Muslim Brotherhood to send another flotilla to Gaza.”

Controversial flotilla members ignored
2 June 2010
http://www.justjournalism.com/media-analysis/view/controversial-profiles-ignored
Since Israel has started releasing detained activists from the Gaza-bound flotilla, their testimonies have received prominent coverage. For example, the BBC News website has produced an article of eyewitness accounts from four different individuals, describing their experiences. Several of the same individuals were quoted in a similar article in The Guardian, ‘We heard gunfire – then our ship turned into lake of blood’.
While the media has been keen to provide the perspective of some activists upon the boats, and to contrast their views with the video footage of Israeli commandos being attacked en masse, as of yet there has been very little background on some of the more controversial figures who were part of the flotilla.
For example, several senior figures from the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood were present, as was a bishop who had already been convicted and imprisoned by Israel for weapons-smuggling. This continues the trend in the media to emphasise one element of the protesters, while ignoring the extremist links and dispositions of others, as documented by Just Journalism here.
As of yet, none of the figures profiled below have been mentioned in relation to the flotilla by any of the broadsheets or the BBC News website:
Bishop Hilarion Capucci
Aboard the Mavi Marmara
No known affiliations
Convicted and imprisoned in the 1970s for smuggling weapons from Lebanon to the PLO
An article in The Daily Telegraph from 2009 described him as a ‘veteran Palestinian rights campaigner’, without mentioning his conviction
Muhammad Al-Baltaji
Ship unknown
Deputy secretary-general, Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood parliamentary bloc
‘[We] will never recognize Israel and will never abandon the resistance’
Sheikh Jalal Al-Sharqi
Ship unknown
Head of the Association of Islamic Scholars in the GCC Countries
Signed a clerics' petition calling to acknowledge Hamas's legitimacy, and to not prevent it from obtaining weapons.
Salam Al-Falahat
Ship unknown
General guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan from 2006 to 2008
‘We see Hamas movement in Palestine as standing at the head of the project of the Arab and Islamic liberation for which the Muslim Brotherhood calls... The Muslim Brotherhood supports Hamas and every Arab resistance movement in the region that works for liberation.’
Hazza' Al-Maswari
Ship unknown
Yemeni MP for Muslim Brotherhood-linked Al-Islah party
Critisised plans to de-radicalise captured Al-Qaeda members:
‘We cannot tell militants 'don't terrorize Americans' or 'don't attack their interests.' Those who plant hatred will harvest hatred.’

Turkish-Iranian Competition
Thu, 03 June 2010
Hassan Haidar''
Al Hayat
http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/148540
Turkey, just like Iran, is acting as though the American withdrawal from Iraq will mean the end of the United States' role in the region. Therefore, both of them believe that the time is right to fill the vacuum and set up the inheritance, while the only main obstacle facing them is Israel, if we were to disregard the slight Arab opposition with which they may be confronted. Consequently, they are trying to "subjugate" the Hebrew state, but each in its own way.
In reality, the "attack" the Turkish way has entailed better results so far. This is due to the fact that - despite the fiery aspect prevailing over the rhetoric of the Turkish leaders nowadays - Turkey is relying on diplomacy, international relations, the economic role, political and religious moderation, the containment of emotions, the tickling of Europe's slogans on human rights and the humoring of the Americans' wish to "take a break" through a truce in the region. Hence, the Turks are closing up on Israel from all sides, are blockading it peacefully, and embarrassing it internationally. By doing so, they are hoping it will recognize the Turkish "command" which is offering guarantees to see its acceptance in the region through promises to turn the Middle East into a "heaven" based on mutual recognition and wide economic exchange – provided that it responds to their demands and commits to the limits of the role they are drawing for it, which would call for the retreat of the basic principle on which it was founded, i.e. that of military power.
As for the Iranians, they are relying on a different approach based on gradual "ironing" through the sponsorship of violence fronts around Israel, whether in Lebanon, Palestine, or maybe even in other locations prone to follow in their footsteps. Through these fronts, it is waging limited confrontations. But each time, it is taking these confrontations to the next level in terms of armament and threats to "convince" Israel of the seriousness of its ongoing rejection of the leading Iranian role in the region. So far, the Iranian style has suited the mentality and doctrine of the Israelis who are responding by raising the level of violence and threats and using this as a pretext to earn the support of the world, which is already disconcerted by the Iranian rebellion against its standards.
Turkey and Iran are competing over influence in the countries surrounding Israel. Indeed, they are both weaving exceptional relations with Syria while in Lebanon, the first is offering political sponsorship to the Sunnis and the second perceives the Shiites in it as being part of its security. In that same context, they are both attempting to infiltrate the social and political fabric in Egypt through the opposition in general and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, while at the same time trying to enhance their influence in Iraq, even if in a different way. Nonetheless, the most heated arena of the competition for the time being is Gaza, with Iran providing rockets, funding and training to the "Jihadist" movements and instigating the continuation of the military confrontations and with Ankara sending aid and political support and seeking to lift the blockade to move Hamas to the political square.
However, between the Turkish and Iranian momentums in the region, most of the Arabs seem to be in a state of defeat and settling for the role of bystanders, while some are cheering in favor of this or that camp without truly being able to affect the situation. In this context, the "battle" waged by Tehran to consecrate the name of "Persian Gulf" and Erdogan's statement during his last speech regarding the fact that Turkey "is not like the other states in the region and is not a tribal state" probably summarize the way the Arabs and their role are perceived by the two latter countries.
In the end, although its new national security strategy is calling for "the drafting of a new world order that would reflect reality in the 21st century" and for the "opening of channels and working with new rising powers" - which was understood as being an American relinquishing of foreign interference - the United States has not yet reached the level of giving up on Israel or leaving it alone in the face of the ambitions of Ankara and Tehran.