On Palestine, identity, and the ‘non-state solution:’ Reviewing Khaled Diab's ‘Intimate Enemies’

Comment: 

My Hebrew - Ex-Jew- speaking Palestinian brother once discovered that he i living in an Occupied Land he left and shall not return until Palestine is liberated from River to Sea.

"a brief book titled, “Intimate Enemies: Living with Israelis and Palestinians in the Holy Land,” recently released as an e-book by the UK-based newspaper The Guardian under their “Guardian Shorts” series."

Khaled Diab's  wrote his "Guardian short ‘ntimate Enemies" for Guardian.

In case you missed it: 

Is it the Guardian Of Judea Or Just The Observer Of Zion? Asked Gilad 

------

On Palestine, identity, and the ‘non-state solution:’ Reviewing Khaled Diab's ‘Intimate Enemies’

Palestinian protesters perform Friday prayers prior to a protest on the highway between Jerusalem and Jericho on November 28, 2014, against the construction of Jewish settlements in the Jordan Valley and against the plan to relocate Bedoiuns from the central West Bank area. AFP/Abbas Momani

By: Yazan al-Saadi

Published Friday, December 5, 2014

Nearly every facet of the conflict over Palestine has been dissected, examined, and rediscovered by writers of a multitude of backgrounds – and there is always room for more. Egyptian-Belgian journalist Khaled Diab is the latest, in a constant stream of writers, to tackle this hefty topic. Diab is mainly interested in the slippery concept of identity, through a paradigm centered on the cultural and social facets which comes at the expense of the historical and political dimensions. In the end, Diab’s proposal, the result of well-intentioned ambitions, falls far short from its lofty goal of solving the “conflict.”

“After years of writing about the conflict, visiting and living [in Palestine], I was struck by how the reality does not match the prevalent, and oft simplistic, narratives and discourses. Mutual fear, distrust and misconceptions are widespread, which undermine efforts to resolve this conflict by enabling extremists to dehumanize the other,” Diab, elaborating on why he decided to tackle the topic, wrote to Al-Akhbar English.

“Most of the available literature, which tends to focus on the situation through the prism of politics or history, does not highlight or dwell on these complex human realities and nuances, and few look at the human face of both Palestinians and Israelis together. As a kind of inside-outsider whose Egyptian identity opened up a surprising number of doors, hearts and minds, I found that I was in a privileged position to write a book of the people as a minor corrective,” he added.

The outcome is a brief book titled, “Intimate Enemies: Living with Israelis and Palestinians in the Holy Land,” recently released as an e-book by the UK-based newspaper The Guardian under their “Guardian Shorts” series. A larger, more expansive version is expected to be released sometime in the first half of 2015.

In the course of almost 50 pages, which can be read in one sitting, Diab’s journalistic attributes are clearly evident. He weaves together a multitude of Palestinian and Israeli voices, each at times respectively different within their own communities, to highlight their social and cultural differences and symmetries.

The writing is concise and easily digestible from the onset, and the fact that Diab was able to amass so many voices is a testament to his seriousness regarding the topic and to his solid journalistic ability.

The writing is concise and easily digestible from the onset, and the fact that Diab was able to amass so many voices is a testament to his seriousness regarding the topic and to his solid journalistic ability. He was not only able to access such voices with ease, but was also able to clearly present them to the reader. As simple as this may seem, it is rare for journalists, let alone writers, to do so, and Diab is quite successful in that regard.

Structurally, the book is akin to a long-form article, in which the general Palestinian and Israeli communities are introduced, their histories and ideologies briefly discussed, before delving into the contradictions and parallels that exist within and between the sub-communities of both. Diab concludes with his own thoughts and views on what the future may hold.

Erased vs. enforced identities

The most successful sections of “Intimate Enemies” in which Diab attempts to ‘cross the political divide’ are parts that discusses Palestinians still residing in the 1948 territories and Mizrahi (West Asian) Jews, both groups whose existence are real examples that cuts through the crude, simplistic and prevalent narratives of Jew vs. Arab or Israeli vs. Palestinian.

Here, the reader, through Diab’s account, comes in contact with Palestinians in 1948 occupied territories, those who are struggling and resisting Israel’s attempts to wipe out their Palestinian identity and those who are more keen in being part of the large Israeli social identity. In the same vein, Mizrahi, or Arab, Jews find themselves equally caught between a constant clash between their traditional, historical Arab identity and their enforced Jewish identity under Israel.

Ultimately, both these two communities are more or less perceived as being ‘caught in the middle,’ due to their peculiar position, and the various trails and tribulations they respectively faced, and continue to face today. Ultimately, they are linked by the core issues that have driven the struggle against Zionism and Israel for decades, issues that include nationality, rights, identity, ownership, dignity, and legitimacy.

These are perhaps the strongest sections in “Intimate Enemies” that will leave the reader with much to ponder.

Other brief sections that are equally as strong are parts of the book in which Diab effectively shows the role reversal that has occurred socially and culturally between Palestinians and Israelis in terms of exile.

In Judaism – especially the European interpretations of the religion – the experience and effect of exile from a “homeland” (whether this is historically or archaeologically accurate is best left for another discussion) was part and parcel of building an identity for centuries and is commonly articulated presently. It has become infused in their political, religious, and cultural acts and thoughts of its followers.

Similarly, for the Palestinians today, many of whom have been forced into exile due to the Zionist ethnic cleansing in 1947-1948, and the ongoing incremental genocide that followed, much of their current social and cultural identity has naturally been shaped by that trauma. The Palestinian, in effect, has become the “wandering Jew.” This adds a further wrinkle to the narratives in play, and Diab is quite effective in that aim.

The Palestinian, in effect, has become the “wandering Jew.” This adds a further wrinkle to the narratives in play, and Diab is quite effective in that aim.

While it is quite rare for articles or books to solely to tackle the Palestinian issue from a social and cultural standpoint, it is not an entirely novel approach. Moreover, for those well-versed in the complexities and history of the conflict, “Intimate Enemies” does not provide anything ground-breaking or new. Because of the brief nature of the work, there is a constant desire left for the reader for more, deeper analysis to the points that Diab brings up, and he does not tackle further complexities within communities like class, urban vs. rural, Gaza vs. West Bank, among other matters.

(Un)masking power dynamics

The most glaring omission, which Diab acknowledges, is a more thorough, critical examination of history and the power dynamics that inherently divides an Israeli and a Palestinian. To his credit, Diab does touch on the historical events, like the Nakba or the Holocaust, but it is more a matter of cursorily noting them.

“I do explore the effects of the Nakba and the loss of Palestine on the Palestinian psyche, as well as the disparity in the power relationship between Israelis and Palestinians, not to mention within Israeli society itself, i.e. the Ashkenazi-Mizrahi divide,” Diab responded when asked of this by Al-Akhbar English. “But, like I said, in the limited space available, I could only go so far, especially since my primary focus is on the people. I go into these issues in much greater detail in the full-length manuscript.”

Diab’s keenness to concentrate on “the people” rather than the political is both important and problematic. Undoubtedly, it is important to humanize those who are effected by the issues and consequences that arose in the colonization and conquest of Palestine. But the effort to humanize and tackle other elements – in this case, the cultural and social sectors – regarding Palestine does not automatically shrug aside the politics. Diab’s desire to separate the two is understandable considering his aims and the limitations he is faced with, but it results in two points of contention.

First is the artificial creation of equivalency. Diab is right to note that there are parallels and symmetries between Palestinians and Israelis, and these parallels are universal and can include any community anywhere in the world. Yet, the facts, history, and politics created one community as the victim and the other as the aggressor, one community as the occupied and the other as the occupier. This is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact despite issues of “terrorism,” the discriminatory treatment of European Jews in Europe, and the evolution of social and cultural norms in occupied Palestine today.

And because of this unequal power relations, whatever bridges built from social and cultural links between Palestinians and Israelis will ultimately collide with all the privileges, advantages, and controls that power bestows to only one of the two.

Secondly, Diab’s compartmentalization and separation of politics from the topic assumes that culture and identity can be apolitical – while the reality is starkly different. To use the classic adage, the personal is political, and the political is personal. The basic identity of Israelis – Zionism – is derived from a political movement and action, and by not challenging or leaving room to discuss the politics, Diab’s “Intimate Enemies” feels hesitant and somewhat naive.

[D]iab’s compartmentalization and separation of politics from the topic assumes that culture and identity can be apolitical – while the reality is starkly different.

 Envisioning a ‘people’s peace process’

This leads to the final point Diab attempts to make during the concluding chapters of “Intimate Enemies.” He argues:

[T]alking of a one- or two-state solution, or even an alliance of city states, is premature. What we urgently need are strategies to help move us towards a state of justice. It is my conviction that we need to pursue an incremental path forward and adopt what I call the “non-state solution.”

Instead of the current fixation on borders and territory, as if soil is so much thicker than blood,
the focus must shift to the people. Prioritising the people will necessitate transforming the
Palestinian struggle into a mass, non-violent civil rights movement. Under this model,
Palestinians will deploy all the tools of peaceful resistance that they have constructed and
utilised over the years, including non-violent protest, civil disobedience, strikes and targeted
boycotts.

In order to do this, Diab adds:

The non-state solution does not actually determine the final form of borders or the character of the state(s) but, on the contrary, can potentially empower the citizenry, rather than the political class, to forge the solution which most appeals to them.

Once disenfranchisement has ended and everyone is an equal citizen, then a bi-national
conversation can commence to reach gradually a final settlement through a people’s peace
process. Any Israeli or Palestinian should be free to propose initiatives and suggest actions.
Any proposals that garner enough initial support should then be voted on by the Israeli and
Palestinian publics. Any measure for which the majority on both sides vote should be
implemented immediately, to create momentum.

Having the voices of people in the process of justice and peace is laudable and necessary. To a degree, Diab hits the mark on the need to bring to the fore voices of those other than usually useless, self-interested politicians who are working with the long-dead, defunct Oslo process. Yet, true justice – and here we are speaking of actual implemented justice, such as the Right of Return, compensation, restitution, reparations, and accountability, which are absolutely necessary for long-term real peace for all – will necessitate that certain voices and concerns – i.e. Israeli – be set aside.

”[I]nstead of the current fixation on borders and territory, as if soil is so much thicker than blood, the focus must shift to the people.” – Khaled Diab, “Intimate Enemies”

If we follow Diab’s suggestion of a “non-state solution,” one that is concerned with ending disenfranchisement and creating equality, that will ultimately require a political, as well as an economic, social, and legal solution. The politics will be vital in the end game, and Diab’s circumventing of the politics is a major flaw in an otherwise generally strong work, and feels more of an unnecessary detour, or for some readers, a dangerous deviation.

This short book dives headfirst into one of the most important regional and international struggles today and is written by a high-profile journalist – who has privileged access to different parts of Palestine and has lived there for a number of years. For this reason, a critical deconstruction and an intellectual review of the work is necessary. This is especially so since Diab ends with a suggestion of a “non-state solution,” a thoughtful, even if lacking proposal. The act of humanizing the ‘other’ is meaningful, but recognizing and acknowledging humanity should not belittle the inequalities in power, privilege, poverty, and suffering. Yes, Palestinians and Israelis are humans, their respective communities assembled from a medley of micro-universes of hopes, fears, desires and dreams that sometimes mirrors each other. However, the similarities end when it comes to occupation, ethnic cleansing, abuse, and humiliation.

In the end, “Intimate Enemies” is useful for those not well-versed in the intricacies of Palestine and want to learn more about the various identities in a quick and easily digestible manner. For those who are in tune with developments in Palestine, “Intimate Enemies” has value in terms of suggested ideas and tactics through a social and cultural lens that should and need to be mulled over.

As for the problems noted above, they stubbornly linger beneath the current abridged edition of “Intimate Enemies,”and one has to wait and see if Diab’s expanded edition will cover the gaps.

Yazan is a staff writer for Al-Akhbar English. Follow him on Twitter:@WhySadeye

A MUST READ

• GILAD ATZMON: ZIONIST PROJECT HAS FAILED; ISRAEL VERY BIG THREAT TO WORLD PEACE
• THE JEWISH SUPREMACY OF JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE
• No alternative to FULL LIBERATION 
• God’s “chosen” Psychopaths
• “Genocidal Supremacy? What Supremacy? This is Blood Libel!”
• Violence of the “Chosen” is a “virtue” and a “moral value”
• “Chosen”, so they can!
• A culture of Supremacy
• God’s Chosen Terrorists 

• Equal Rights for serial killers, and for their victims ? 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

GOLIATH; LIFE AND LOATHING IN GREATER ISRAEL

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2013 AT 1:09AM GILAD ATZMON

Book Review By Eugene Schulman
As most of you know, I have been following events in the Israel/Palestine conflict for years.  I have built up a library over those years of hundreds of books, both pro and con on the issues.  This is the first one I have read that has turned my stomach.  Not because it is untruthful or poorly written, rather, whether you believe the author or not, the tale he describes is one of unrelenting cruelty.  Have a gander at the Amazon link below for a description of what I would say is the most important book on contemporary Israel I have read.  Don't forget to read the customer reviews.

Of all the reviews I had read prior to reading the book: Chris Hedges at Truthdig; Larry Gross, also at Truthdig; Tablet, a magazine of Jewish writing, which laughably calls it a novel, the best one is Gilad Atzmon at Common Dreams who, after praising the book, asks the most important question of all - WHY is Israel the way it is?  Of course, anyone who has read his "Wandering Who?" will know the answer.  It is a Jewish identity crisis.

I would add my own conclusion:  That Israel and the US are tied at the hip in their foreign policies, and because of US support, Israel can and does get away with anything it wishes, just as the US does.  Recent "deal" with Iran over its nuclear issues notwithstanding.

To Become A Jew...(must watch)

                        

Sunday, October 27, 2013 at 12:29PM Gilad Atzmon

 

A Loyalist from Northern Ireland becomes Jewish, he plans to move to Israel and settle and start a new life. He exclaims that Palestine was a "political invention" and tells Palestinians who have lived there their whole life "you have had a nice holiday, time to go home". This is an extremely valid argument as this man has never set foot on the Land of Israel or Palestine. This Snippet was taken from the BBC documentary called Shalom Belfast.

We are not dealing here with Jewish race or gene. Taking on the Jewish religion in this case introduces a set of supremacist non ethical beliefs. This is what Jewishness is all about.

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics - available on Amazon.com  & Amazon.co.uk

 

Zionist Radio: Booby-Trapped Tunnel Dug from Gaza toward Israel Uncovered

بالصور: اكتشاف أكبر وأخطر نفق حفرته المقاومة يصل غزة بإسرائيل بطول 2 كم

Local Editor

The Zionist army discovered a booby-trapped tunnel that was dug from the south of the Gaza Strip into the occupied territories "to be used for committing a terrorist attack," the Zionist radio said Sunday.

"Army troops discovered the tunnel openings inside Israel, and they have worked for several days to neutralize the explosives planted inside it," the radio quoted Zionist military sources as saying.
The sources also claimed that the tunnel had been drilled for 15 meters in depth and for 2 and a half kilometers in length.

They added the tunnel "was remarkably wide and it is not unlikely that saboteurs were intending to use it to kidnap a soldier or for future military operation against the (Zionist) army."

Source: Websites	13-10-2013 - 12:04 Last updated 13-10-2013 - 12:05

Syria: The faces behind terror

Press tv

 

Militants preparing to launch mortar rounds in Syria (file photo)

In her extraordinarily bold and direct speech addressed to the Irish Parliament, Clare Daly (TD, Dublin North) called Obama a “war criminal” and “hypocrite of the century”.

While Daly was quite right in censuring Obama for his criminal policies, including aiding terrorists in Syria, it is worthwhile noting that Obama is merely a willing instrument; the faces and factors behind his handlers and the policies merit greater scrutiny and exposure.

Backing and arming the so-called Syrian opposition distracts from the threat posed by Israel and its expansionist agenda by internalizing the enemy in order to weaken the state. As former Israeli Intelligence Chief, Amos Yaldin told the audience at the Israel Policy Forum in February 2013: “And this military (Syrian military), which is a huge threat to Israel, is now also weakening and, in a way, disintegrating. We still have risk from Syria-- a risk of being an AlQaeda country, a Somalia-type country -- but from military point of view, each one of these are less dangerous than the Syrian regular army."

Perpetuating adversaries to kill each other is a time-tested tactic - one which was used during the bloody eight year Iran-Iraq war; a war which according to Leon Wieseltier was a “distraction” when Israeli boots were on the ground in Southern Lebanon. In that war, the United States was providing arms and intelligence to both sides. When asked what the logic was in aiding both sides in the bloody war, a former official replied: “You had to have been there”. But why Syria?

The need for water
The primary goal of the early Zionist leadership was to control and secure the region’s waters. At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, Chaim Weizmann declared that “it was of vital importance not only to secure all water resources feeding the country, but to control them at the sources” - and the development of these waters became the primary aim of the Yishuv as a whole. This policy remained in place. As Israel’s third Prime Minister Levi Eshkol put it, water was “the blood flowing through the arteries of the nation”.

As previously stated, the chaos we witness in Syria today has been in the making for years with the aid and backing of Israel-firsters in order to accommodate Israel’s agenda - expansion and control of regional water supplies while weakening its adversaries.

Israel faced one of its worst droughts in 1990-91. A second more serious drought in 1998, forced it to turn to water-rich Turkey. Turkey and Israel engaged in serious negotiations starting in May 2000 to import 50 billion cubic meters of fresh water from Turkey using tanker ships, but using tankers was not cost-effective for the transport of water. Alternate plans were suggested.

In September 2000, the same year that young Bashar-al Assad succeeded his father as President of Syria, a strategy paper entitled “The Geopolitics of Water” by the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (IASPS) opined that "Since extensive water planning proposals will necessitate the establishment of pipelines and energy grids stretching across borders, a political and military structure that can ensure the safety and security of the carriers will be the prerequisite to effective water sharing ….. But an effective regional system would require political-military cooperation against Syria”.
But could this be achieved?

Israeli-firsters to the rescue
Media mogul Haim Saban became involved in politics in the mid 1990’s with a view to support Israel. Saban professes that his greatest concern is the “protection” of Israel. At a conference in Israel, Saban described his method of influencing American politics “Make donations to political parties, establish think tanks, and control media outlets”. (Saban penned an opinion piece in The New York Times in support of President Obama in his 2012 re-election bid.)

It was no surprise, therefore, that in 2002, Saban pledged $13 million to start a research organization at the Brookings Institution called the Saban Center for Middle East Policy. Saban Center would play an important role in propping up Syrian opposition (as it did in fermenting the post-election unrest in Iran in 2009 with their June 2009 publication titled: "Which Path to Persia? Options for a New American Strategy Towards Iran").

In 2006, Time Magazine revealed that the US had been agitating, funding, and supporting "opposition" in Syria. According to the magazine, the US was "supporting regular meetings of internal and diaspora Syrian activists" in Europe. The document bluntly expresses the hope that "these meetings will facilitate a more coherent strategy and plan of actions for all anti-Assad activists."

It is worthwhile mentioning here that America’s support for the so-called “opposition” which includes criminals, terrorists, and foreign fighters to effect regime change underscores America’s stark hypocrisy. According to 18 USC § 2385 - Advocating Overthrow of Government (Cornell Law), advocating the overthrow of the government, “organizing or help or attempt to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of the government of the United States or the government of any political subdivision therein, by force or violence” bears serious consequences, including fines and prison sentences of up to 20 years.

What is most revealing about the abovementioned Time Magazine piece of 2006 is that America’s efforts to aid the opposition and undermine Assad were run through a foundation operated by Amar Abdulhamid, a Washington-based member of a Syrian umbrella opposition group known as the National Salvation Front (NSF). Abdulhamid was a visiting Fellow at the Saban Center (2004-2006) before moving on to the Neocon-run National Defense of Democracies.

When in 2008, Israel-firster Dennis Ross met with the "opposition" to discuss "Syria in Transition", Saban’s fellow - Amar Abdullhamid was present. In February 2009, Dennis Ross joined the Obama Administration team. In April 2009, the US-funded, London-based Baraada TV started its anti-Assad propaganda into Syria (The epicenter of the uprisings was Baraada over water distribution). Baraada TV’s Chief Editor, Malik al-Abdeh, is a cofounder of the Syrian exile group Movement for Justice and Development headed by Anas al-Abdah who was in attendance at the 2008 meeting with Dennis Ross.

It came as no surprise that John McCain who was a member of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI) formed to rid Iraq of Saddam Hossein, and a cheerleader for the Libya intervention, the Egyptian opposition to Mubarak, for bombing Iran, and so on…..visited Syrian “opposition” (via Turkey) in order to encourage more bloodshed. And expectedly, he was de-briefed -- not at the White House, but at the Saban Center!

Soon after McCain’s presentation at the Saban Center, the White House disputed UN’s account and claimed that that Syria had crossed the “red line” and used chemical weapons.

It is not the intention of this article to exclude the plethora of other individuals, think tanks, forums, and media pundits who have institutionalized Israel’s policies and promoted them as “America’s interests”; these are too numerous to mention here. However, another notable Israel supporter must be named.

The evangelical factor
While various groups in Washington perpetuate and support Israel’s aggressive and expansionist policies -- at America’s cost, none have the zeal and the zest of the Evangelicals who support Israel to death. According to the dispensational model, a time of turmoil lies ahead, but believers will be "raptured" away before it begins. This period of tribulation will culminate in the final battle at Armageddon, a valley northwest of Jerusalem.

The close association between American evangelicals and Israel has been a clear goal of Israeli politicians, especially those in the Likud party. According to Rabbi Marc Tanenbaum of AJC, “the evangelical community is the largest and fastest-growing bloc of pro-Jewish sentiment in this country.” Israel and Jewish organizations continue to rely on the support of evangelicals to justify Israel’s occupation of Arab land even as Christian Zionists’ zest for evangelizing Jews remains a point of tension.

For example, within days of the June 1982 invasion of Lebanon (with a green light from Reagan), full-page ads appeared in leading papers requesting evangelical support for the invasion. In 1998, when Benjamin Netanyahu visited Washington, he met with Jerry Falwell and numerous fundamentalist Christians before meeting with President Clinton. Similarly, as recently as April 2013, Pat Robertson warned that brokering peace between Israel and Palestine would bring punishment on America .

It has been alleged that funds raised in America by right-wing Christians is funneled to West Bank settlements. The mayor of Ariel on the West Bank had estimated that two thirds of all Jewish settlements were funded by Christian Zionists.

Building for Armageddon?
While evangelicals (not all) are rupture-ready and encourage Israel’s expansionist agenda, Israeli politicians are not yet Armageddon-ready; at least, not yet.

In March 2013, Business Inside revealed that the United States is spending hundreds of millions of dollars building bunkers in Israel due to be completed 900 days from February 13, 2013. The project called Site 911 “will have five levels buried underground and six additional outbuildings on the above grounds, within the perimeter. At about 127,000 square feet, the first three floors will house classrooms, an auditorium, and a laboratory - all wedged behind shock resistant doors - with radiation protection and massive security. Only one gate will allow workers entrance and exit during the project and that will be guarded by only Israelis.”

Each door of the facility will have a detailed description of the mezuzahs written in “in-erasable ink”.

This should be heartwarming news to Americans whose taxes are spent on such projects while the bridges at home are crumbling.

The future
The list of conflicts awaiting us is long and bloody. Syria will not be the last conflict. We continue to sink our head in sand and hope for a hero - for ‘something to happen’. There is only one hope for the future, and the only one power that can alter this destructive path: “We, The People”.

SSU/NN

• S Arabia funds terrorists in Syria: Russia

I'm an Israeli Soldier (must watch)

 

Tuesday, March 26, 2013 at 12:06PM Gilad Atzmon

 

Israel popular culture provides us with a perfect insight into Israeli collective morbidity. This is what Israeli consume culturally, this is how they interpret the meaning of their Jewish identity. This is the true reality of the Jewish state..

Double Standards for Prisoners Vanished In "Israel"

Secret Prisoners of "Israel’s" Past

By: Yahya Dbouk Al-Akhbar daily, February 15, 2013 The case of Ben Zygier, known as "Prisoner X," has opened the door to questions about the possibility of "Israel" secretly detaining other prisoners and abductees. Zygier, a Jewish-Australian citizen, died in an "Israeli" prison two years ago, in a case "Israel" went to extreme lengths to cover up, imposing media gag orders. Until recently, the global norm was to accept that "Israel" is an entity where the rule of law is paramount. This is not the first time "Israel" has hidden information related to the whereabouts and conditions of prisoners. Consider, for example, reports of the three Iranian diplomats kidnapped by the Lebanese Forces during the "Israeli" invasion of Lebanon in 1982, who were reportedly moved to prisons in occupied Palestine. Then consider the case of Lebanese prisoner Yahya Skaf. In addition to a wealth of reporting on his case, testimonies by other detainees all aver that he is still alive and being held in an "Israeli" prison. It's a claim that Tel Aviv denies, maintaining that it lost Skaf's body. In the same vein, reports from various sources assert that Iranian General Mohammed Reza Asgari, who was kidnapped in Turkey in 2007, is being held in "Israel". Until recently, the global norm was to accept that "Israel" is an entity where the rule of law is paramount. Any reports that questioned "Israel's" democratic credentials were considered prejudiced or even anti-Semitic. Yet if Tel Aviv was able to conceal the truth about Zygier for so long - the fact that he had committed suicide more than two years ago - then it's entirely fathomable that "Israel" is withholding the truth about other prisoners like Skaf, Asgari, and the above-mentioned Iranian diplomats. The answer is now clear and backed up by damning evidence: "Israel" has both the capability and the willingness to engage in such acts. A simple hypothetical exercise. Let's say the kidnapping, detention, and subsequent suicide of the Australian Prisoner X had happened to another detainee of a different nationality. How would the global media reaction differ? Would it have been as fervent as with the Australian Prisoner X? Just look to the cases of the Lebanese and Iranian detainees, specifically with the three Iranian diplomats and General Asgari. Iran repeatedly declared that it had evidence as to their whereabouts, and the Iranian press reported extensively on the matter. Yet "Israeli" denials were enough to refute the Iranian account. Western and "Israeli" reports did not stop there, and Iran was even mocked as a source of fabricated news. The same applies to cases involving Lebanese citizens, such as Skaf. "Israel" cannot possibly deny it has him, and that he had entered occupied Palestine. For one thing, Tel Aviv's claims about Skaf and his lost body make little sense. If he had been a citizen of Australia, or other nations of similar stature, "Israel's" account would have differed. "Israeli" assertions that Tel Aviv had kept the Australian government in the loop on Prisoner X created more - not less - ramifications. Indeed, "Israel" is not only able to hide the facts and detain people in secret, but also to involve Western governments in the cover-up. Secret Prisoners of "Israel's" Past Mohamad Bdeir "Israel" is not only able to hide the facts and detain people in secret, but also to involve Western governments in the cover-up. Ben Zygier's is not the first case where the authorities in Tel Aviv detained someone in secret, isolating them from the outside world and denying their existence. The "Israeli" tradition in this regard dates back to the 1950s, with the precedent set in the arrest of Mordechai ‘Motke' Kedar. Kedar served in Unit 131 of the military intelligence and was detained for the murder of an agent working for Mossad during a mission in Argentina. When Kedar was arrested in 1957, his imprisonment was kept under wraps. The only details that surfaced at the time were reported by the "Israeli" daily Yedioth Ahronot, It was able to report the detention of a "secret agent" before the military censors in Israel imposed a gag order. Kedar remained in a secret section of the Ramle prison for 17 years. He was also nicknamed "Prisoner X." After his 1974 release, he immediately left "Israel". Kedar returned in the 1990s to demand a retrial, but to no avail. After Kedar, there was the case of Shabtai Kalmanovich, a Lithuanian Jew who was recruited by the KGB in exchange for allowing him to emigrate from the USSR to "Israel". There, he became active in the Labor party, and served as a parliamentary assistant for a Labor MP. Kalmanovich was arrested years later on charges of passing information to Soviet intelligence for 17 years. He spent five years in prison before he was granted an early release due to his health. In 2009, Kalmanovich was shot dead by unknown assailants in Moscow and was buried afterwards in Israel. Avraham Marcus Klingberg, a Polish Jew, was another secret detainee. He enlisted in the Red Army during World War II and then emigrated to "Israel". Klingberg served in the "Israeli" army, and rose through the ranks to lieutenant colonel. After that, he served as the deputy head of a biological institute that was responsible, according to press reports, for weapons research. He was arrested in 1977, and during his interrogation, he admitted that he had been working for the Soviets for 20 years, during which he relayed classified information on "Israel's" biological and chemical weapons research. Klingberg was sentenced to 20 years in prison, but his detention was kept secret for ten years. In the late ‘90s, his sentence was shifted to house arrest. In 2003, he left "Israel" to live in France. Another case involves Mordechai Vanunu, the famous nuclear whistleblower who was kidnapped by Mossad in Italy in 1986. Vanunu was tried and jailed in "Israel" for 18 years for exposing secrets related to the "Israeli" nuclear program that employed his as a technician. Similarly, Yitzhak Yaakov, a brigadier general in the "Israeli" army reserve, was arrested and tried in secret in 2001 for disclosing national security secrets in his autobiography. In most cases where the "Israeli" authorities engaged in secret proceedings and cover-ups, the excuse cited was preserving national security secrets. However, there are other cases where "Israel" secretly detained people for years after kidnapping them. One prominent case of this kind involves six Lebanese prisoners who were handed over to "Israel" by the Lebanese Forces in the late 1980s. "Israel" kept their detention secret for over seven years before notifying the International Committee of the Red Cross of their existence as part of negotiations for a prisoner swap with the Resistance.

Exorcism / When Peoples Recover Dignity

By Daniel Mabsout,



We have been cheated for so long and we have contributed to the plight that has been inflicted on us . We have glorified our enemies and turned them into gods and idols, we have turned them into examples and models to all . The more cruel they proved to be the more we surrendered to them and acknowledged their authority and superiority and this is what made them even more determined to transgress human and natural laws and commit what they commit .

We have followed them blindly and made them lead us on the way of knowledge and science and progress and success. We believed that they were the promising future and the bright tomorrows . We felt that there was no alternative but follow their steps and walk in their trails. We knew probably that we could never catch up with them and that we will lag behind endlessly, nevertheless we continued on the same pace and playing the same tune , each step forward made us more dispossessed and vulnerable .

Gradually we were stripped of our culture and language and tradition while thinking that we were treading the path of progress . We made the enemies our reference, we overlooked their horrors and crimes , we thought these were the price we have to pay for the betterment of humanity in general , and we were ready to pay the price as high as it proved to be . Palestine was taken which was a big thing in itself and then our resources were exploited and taken , our language our heritage were declared useless , our traditions outdated , our society inadequate, our thinking reactionary , our heritage empty .

This is what our enemy made of us : a complete failure , leaving us in want of everything , demonizing us thus, making us convinced that our culture and civilization were defective and in great need to be straightened and redeemed . This process of demonizing touched all people : the Natives , the Africans , the Arabs , the Muslims . The western monster demonized all keeping all the good attributes to himself and acting in the name of God and religion and welfare of humanity while helpless we watched this usurping of the morals and principles in which we had faith.

Without this demonizing process the indigenous t could not be stripped of everything including his own identity. We rejected what could not be admitted or praised by the superior west, we became thus removed from our cultural and social and historical identity . We became nobody and therefore it became easy to fill us with anything including the big lie of the civilized west .
 
This lasted until something unusual happened . It happened in Iran. The great achievement of the Islamic Revolution of Iran was to recover the lost treasure , to give back to us our identity and superiority and reality and above all our dignity . Once this war of dignity won , once the cultural and spiritual superiority of the indigenous over the predators asserted and confirmed and experienced, then all the other wars could be easily won.

‘US hates Iran, because…..’

 

Posted on December 17, 2012 |

Islamic Republic of Iran is among the very few world nations (Cuba and Venezuela being the two others) which have broken the chains of the western Zionist bankers’ imperialism. That’s the major reason the former western colonial powers have been threatening Iran with sanctions and war for the last three decades.

Iranian have suffered at the hands of foreign powers (Russian, British and Americans) for centuries. The 1979 Islamic Revolution open a door of national independence and dignity for them. Since then, Iranian have not backed-down against all odds – and finally became “the most powerful regional nation“, according to Lord David Owen, former British foreign secretary, Daily Record, December 16, 2011.

In 1980, an Iranian jailer summed-up Iranian mindset when the chief of US embassy staff, Bruce Laingen, called his imprisnment “immoral, illegal and totally wrong”. He replied to Laingen: “You have nothing to complain about. The United States took our entire country hostage in 1953“.
Recently, professor Rodney Shakespeare (Jakarta’s Trisakti University), a world renowned political commentator told Namavaran Network Corporation (NNC) that United States hates Iran for later’s independence from the westen-controlled World Order and Iran’s support of anti-Israel resistance groups.

“The USA hates any country, such as Iran, which wants to be independent. Which is why the USA is continually pushing for a regime change in Tehran. On top of that the USA’s foreign policy is to support the Zionist entity in every possible way, which means, if at all possible, the general destruction of any Islamic country (Somalia, Libya, Sudan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) and the specific destruction of Iran. Iran stands firm against ever-expanding Israel which has a Nazi-like policy of lebensraum, i.e., Israel believes that there are lands inhibited by a sub-human species who may be expelled leaving the lands for Zionist expansion (Eretz Yisrael). Israel, apart from committing war crimes, is implementing a creeping genocide in Gaza and Palestine – and Iran is the only country giving clear, unambiguous opposition. The USA actively supports the (Palestinian) genocide,” said Rodney Shakespeare.

Professor Rodney Shakespeare also added that Washington have been lying about Iran’s intentions to produce nuclear weapons for the last 20 years. “However, there are signs that the world is begining to wake-up to the Zionist lies and America’s unreasonable hatred of Iran is increasingly being noticed by sensible people everywhere“, he said. Read the entire interview here.

Flooding Syria with Foreign Arms: A View from Damascus

Franklin Lamb
Damacus

Al-Manar


Across Syria these days, one is able to examine massive evidence that this ancient civilization, the historic bastion of nationalist Arabism and since the 1948 Nabka, an essential pillar of the growing culture of Resistance to the Zionist occupation of Palestine, is becoming awash with foregin arms being funneled to “rebels” by countries advocating regime change.

This observer has been researching foreign arms transfers into certain Middle East countries since last summer in Libya, where to a lesser degree the identical foreign actors were involved in faciliating the transfer of arms and fighters to topple the then, “Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.”

During a recent stay in Syria, I was able to observe first hand, substantial demostrative evidence supporting the thesis that American, Zionist and Gulf intelligence agencies as well as private arms dealers from these countries top the list of of more than two dozen countries benefiting from the crisis in Syria by injecting arms. These counries gain politically and financially, via governmental and black market arms transfers.

Which countries are sending the most weapons into Syria to arm militia?

A list of the top 24 countries, among the more than three dozen that are currently ivolved in sending weapons to Syria to achieve regime change include:

USA, Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Bahrain, UK, France, Canada, Belgium, Germany, Austria, Brazil, Portugal, Poland, Yugoslavia, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Italy, Spain, and Argentina.

Nearly two-thirds of the above listed arms suppliers are members of NATO and constitute almost half of NATO’s 28 country membership.

Russia is not included in the above list because it is the main supplier of arms to the Syrian government. Yet, one finds older USSR era weapons and even some more recent vintage Russian arms in rebel hands, the latter from the decade (12/79-2/89) of Soviet, occupation of Afghanistan. Also offering Russian weapons are a growing number of black market arms dealers of whom there is no shortage along the Turkey-Syrian border and elsewhere.

This recent visitor to Syria was offered near the Old City, AK 47’s (Russian Kalashnikovs) or Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG) for $ 1,800 (in Lebanon today and before the Syrian crisis the price was around $800. After some bargaining and starting to walk away a couple of times, the “special one-time only price for an American friend” dropped to $ 750 each. Russian made Dragunov sniper rifles are being offered at $ 6,500 but can be bought for around $ 5000.

Buying arms these days in Syria is a caveat emptor proposition. Fake weapons and military rejects/defects are also being offered by hustlers from nearby countries including Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey.

The involvement of numerous countries in the Syrian crisis as arms suppliers and political operatives was tangencialy referenced by the recent UN Security Council Statement of 12/25/12 which admits the existence of foreign actors and implies their arms supplying activities by urging "all regional and international actors to use their influence on the parties concerned to facilitate the implementation of the (Eid al Adha) ceasefire and cessation of violence."

Syria's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Bashar al-Jaafari observed last week:

"This part of the [Security Council] press statement, mentioned for the first time, proves Syria's view repeated since the beginning of the crisis on the existence of Arab, regional and international parties influencing the armed groups negatively or positively. Therefore, those parties need to be addressed."

One of the key challenges for the UN and Arab League envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi whose aides told this observer at the Dama Rose hotel on 10/22/12 where we were staying, is: "We need to persuade key countries in the Middle East, but also internationally, not to support the rebels with arms.

The failed initiative of envoy Brahimi, was the third ceasefire attempt to date following the December 2011Arab League proposal and the April 2012 Kofi Annan initiative, both of which were endorsed by the Syrian government and most of the world community. Some rebel militia, but not nearly enough, did endorse the Brahimi four day Eid al Adha ceasefire only to have it collapse this past weekend. To his credit, Brahimi continues his work.

The same Brahimi sources suggested that the United States may also be supplying man-portable air-defense systems (Manpods) to rebels in Syria.

According to Russian Foregin Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich, speaking on 12/15/12: “At the same time, it is also well-known that Washington is aware of supplies of various types of arms to illegal armed groups operating in Syria. Moreover, the United States, judging by admissions by American officials that have also been published in American media, is conducting coordination and providing logistical support for such supplies.” NBC News, based in New York reported in July that Syrian insurgents had obtained two dozen US MANPADS, delivered from Turkey.

A month after the October 2011 death of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced in Tripoli that the U.S. was committing $40 million to help Libya "secure and recover its weapons stockpiles." Congressional sources report that the Obama administration is fully aware that quantities of these arms are current in Syria and more in transit.

With respect to arms moving from Libya to Syria, on the night of Sept. 11 Libya time, in what was his last public meeting, US Ambassador Christopher Stevens met with the Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and accompanied him to the consulate front gate just before the assault began. Although what was discussed has not yet been made public, Washington sources including the pro-Zionist Fox News speculate that Stevens may have been in Benghazi negotiating a weapons transfer, from Libya to Syria.

Earlier this year, Assistant Secretary of State for Political and Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro expressed concerns that the increasing flow of Libya arms was far from under control. Speaking to the Stimson Center in Washington D.C. on 2/10/12 Shapiro said:

"This raises the question -- how many weapons and missiles are still missing? The frank answer is we don't know and probably never will."

According to a 10/14/12 report by the Times of London, a vessel flying the Libyan flag named Al Entisar (Victory), loaded with more than 400 tons of cargo, docked in southern Turkey 35 miles from the Syrian northern border. While some of the undeclared cargo was likely humanitarian, staff accompanying UN envoy Brahimi during his recent Syrian trip report the Al Entisar also carried the largest consignment of foreign weapons to date, including surface-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, RPG's and MANPADS destined for Syria.

Partly because of the jihadists and arms entering Syria from its northern border, southern Turkey is increasingly referred to here in Damascus as “New Afghanistan”, given its matrix of jihadists, salafists, wahabists, and battle-hardened panoply of arriving foreign would-be mujahedeen and al Qaeda affiliates.

Remarkably, as was witnessed in 2007, during the conflict at the Nahr al Bared Palestinian refugee camp in north Lebanon, some of the arriving eager jihadists in “New Afghanistan” actually believe that they are fighting against Zionist forces near occupied Palestine and not killing fellow Arabs in Syria.

Some, but not all of the many types of small arms flowing into Syria in large numbers, and viewed by this observer include:

7.62mm Tabuk (Yugoslavia) rifles, Mass rifles (UK), 7.62 mm rifles (Poland), 12 mm rifles (Italy), 7.62 mm Kalashnikovs (several countries versions), 9 mm ‘fast gun’, (Austria), 7.62 mm Val (Belgium), G3 7.62 mm G3 rifles (Germany), 7.5mm model 36 rifles (France), M16 and a variety of sniper and other rifles (USA), 7.62 rifles (Bulgaria, 10.5 Uzi and other automatic machine guns, three types of hand grenades (Israel), 9 mm guns (Canad), 7 mm guns (Czech Republic), 7 mm guns (Brazil),

The observer also examined and was briefed on M72 LAW and AT-3 anti-tank missiles developed by the United States. But the extent of their use is difficult to verify. Most of the arms shown in accompanying photos are from the main urban centers and near the Turkish, Iraqi, Lebanese and Jordanian borders.

In tightly built up urban areas such as Homs, Idlib and Aleppo, door to door fighting includes a battle among snipers. According to one Syrian military intelligence source in whose Damascus office this observer discussed the subject, the most frequently confiscated sniper rifles currently being found in the hands of “rebels” include:

• · the U.S. Army & USMC M1903-A4 (also: USMC M1903-A1/Unertl), the U.S. Army & USMC M1C & M1D and U.S. Army M21;
• · the Israeli M89SR Technical Equipment International 7.62x51mm NATO Semi-automatic, Galil Sniper Rifle and the T.C.I. M89-SR,
• · the British .243 Winchester, 7.62x51mm NATO/.308 Winchester,.300 Winchester Magnum, and the 338 Lapua Magnum Bolt action sniper rifles.

A few Afghanistan era Russian Dragonov SVD and SV-98 sniper rifles have also been confiscated among an assortment of others.

Foreign jihadists have some access to Soviet-era DShK heavy machine guns or ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft cannons which are used for anti-aircraft and fire support. Both use fairly scarce high-explosive rounds and armor-piercing rounds, which are capable of penetrating the armor of the Syrian military's BMP infantry fighting vehicles. The ZU-23-2 "Sergey", also known as ZU-23, is a Soviet towed 23 mm anti-aircraft cannon. Vehicle mounted Zu-23-2’s are relatively easy to spot by government aircraft and artillery units are used to attack a target and quickly flee to avoid counter strikes.

On 10/25/12 Russia reiterated its claims that the US assists and coordinates arms deliveries to foreign-sponsored insurgents battling the Syrian government forces. Russia's chief military officer said that Syrian armed groups have acquired US-made weapons, including Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. This observer saw many weapons from more than a dozen types of IED’s (improvised explosive device) to medium sized artillery pieces but no missiles.

According to the Russian Foreign Ministry issued statement of 10/25/12,

“Washington is aware of the deliveries of various weapons to illegal armed groups active in Syria. Moreover, judging by the declarations of US officials published in US media, the US coordinates and provides logistical assistance in such deliveries.”

Some analysts in Damascus claim that Syria’s potential military strength has not been as effective as it could be in the current urban fights against rebels. The government appears very strong militarily if one studies the statistics regarding Syria’s large and disciplined army which continues its support and also given its sophisticated long range missiles, air defense systems that have deterred an airborne attack from Israel. One reason progress has at times appeared slow against the “rebels” according to some local analysts was a certain initial unpreparedness to confront highly motivated guerrilla militia in downtown densely populated areas.

These kinds of battles, it is claimed, require a mobile infantry, armored flexibility and very effective use of light arms. The Assad government’s “adapt, catch up and go on the offensive” paradigm is developing rapidly according to US Senate Armed Service Committee sources who assert that the Syria army has actually become battle hardened, tougher, stronger and more disciplined over the past several months. But it has taken time and has incurred a significant cost.

Weapons examined by this observer in Syria during 10/12 include some of the more than 1,750 new American sniper rifles channeled from Iraq and NATO supply stores to rebel militia.

How foreign weapons are entering Syria

As widely speculated particularly in the regional media, foreign supplied weapons to “rebels” arrive by air, sea and mainly by land from Iraq, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan and occupied Palestine.

Israel is reported, by some researchers in Damascus who have been covering the crisis for nearly 20 months, to be sending arms to Syria from Kurdistan, having had much experience in Africa, South America and Eastern Europe via Mossad and Israeli black market arms dealing.

What Israel did in Libya in terms of a wide spread arms business it is also trying to do in Syria. Israeli arms, according to Syrian and Lebanese sources are being transported into Syria from along the tri-border area of South Lebanon, near Shebaa Farms, close to Jabla al-Saddaneh, and Gadja. In addition, Israeli smugglers have increasingly, over the past five months, been seen by locals moving arms inside Syria via the Golan Heights. These violations of Syrian and Lebanese sovereignty raise serious questions about the vigilance of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force Zone (UNDO) based in the Golan Heights as well as the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and the Lebanese Army as well as National Lebanese Resistance units near the ‘blue line’ to stop the these illicit Israeli arms transfers.

The recent arrival in southern Turkey and along the northern Syrian border of Blackwater mercenaries is expected to increase the foreign arms flow. Currently using the name Academi (previously known as Xena- Xe Services LLC, Blackwater USA and Blackwater Worldwide) Academi is currently, according to Jane’s Defense Weekly, the largest of the US governments “private security” contractors. Details of its relationship with the US Defense Department and the CIA are classified.

Is there a coherent US policy toward the Syrian crisis?

Secretary of State Clinton has been announcing recently that the U.S. is increasing its “non-lethal support” (i.e. direct shipments as opposed to boots on the ground or ballistic weapons) according to her Congressional liaison office. She also confirmed that Washington is working with its friends and allies to promote more cohesion among the disparate Syrian opposition groups with the aim of producing a new leadership council following meetings scheduled for Doha in the coming weeks.
However, to the consternation of the State Department, General David Petraeus the former US commander of NATO forces in Iraq, now director of the CIA acknowledged, during his senate confirmation hearings.

“Non-lethal aid to combatants, including communication equipment, is sometimes more lethal and important than explosive devices due to the logistical advantages they provides on the battlefield.”

In tandem with the US, the UK and several European governments are supplying “non-lethal” aid to the Syrian opposition, including satellite communications equipment according to Syria security sources.

There is also plenty of anecdotal and demonstrative and probative evidence in Syria of human weapons patterned on the "Zarqawi model” which refers to the bloody al Qaeda in Mesopotamia campaign named for its leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi after U.S. troops occupied Iraq.

In a speech this week in Zagreb, Croatia, this week, Secretary of State Clinton insisted that any group seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad must reject attempts by extremists to "hijack" a legitimate revolution. She added, “There are disturbing reports of heavily armed foreign extremists going into Syria and attempting to take over.”

Clinton used her strongest words to date concerning risks that the uprising in Syria could be overtaken by militants who do not seek a democratic replacement or the reforms that the current government claims it is trying to implement. She told her conferees:

"We made it clear that the SNC can no longer be viewed as the visible leader of the opposition. They can be part of a larger opposition, but that opposition must include people from inside Syria and others who have a legitimate voice. We also need an opposition that will be on record strongly resisting the efforts by extremists to hijack the Syrian revolution. There are disturbing reports of heavily armed extremists going into Syria and attempting to take over.”

Clinton advised her colleagues that the US has become convinced that the SNC does not represent the interests of all ethnic and religious groups in Syria and that it has little legitimacy among on-the-ground activists and fighters, and has done little to stem the infiltration of Islamist extremists into the opposition forces.

Clinton’s language is being interpreted by some as evidence that a post-election Obama Whitehouse, she he win on November, may move toward the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian position and away from, what one Congressional source derisively labeled, “ the view from the Gulf gas stations” i.e. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and some other despotic monarchies.

The intervention in Syria by more than three dozen countries supplying weapons must be stopped. Both sides of the Syrian crisis need to manifest by actions, not just words, a serious commitment to meaningful dialogue. The above noted arms supplying countries, and others off stage, have a solemn obligation to their citizens and to the world community to immediately halt the shipment of arms.
They should, and their people should demand that they do without further delay, honor the words of Isaiah 2:3-5….”and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.”
Granted, perhaps a cliché and certainly far easier said than done.

Yet, as Oregon’s late great US Senator Wayne Morse used tell audiences around America during the Vietnam War, quoting General George Marshall, “The only way we human beings can win a war is to prevent it.”

It’s time for the international community to end the Syrian crisis diplomatically, stop funneling arms and cash fueling hoped for regime change elements. Instead, they must demand that all the involved parties immediately engage in serious dialogue and settle their differences.

Franklin Lamb, just returned from Syria and is reachable c/o fplamb@gmail.com

Source: Al-Manar Website