Uprooted Palestinian

Iran Commander: US Can’t Bar Iran from Shutting Hormuz – Larijani: Iran to Avenge Scientist Assassination

uprootedpalestinians — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:50:00 +0000

Iran Commander: US Can’t Bar Iran from Shutting Hormuz

A senior Iranian commander has underscored the Islamic Republic’s military might, saying that the US lacks the capability to hinder Iran’s efforts to shut down the strategic Strait of Hormuz if Tehran deems it necessary to take the measure.

“Regardless of their publicity campaigns and propaganda efforts, the Americans are incapable of confronting Iranian actions in a number of spheres, including the potential plan [by Iran] to shut down the Strait of Hormuz,” Deputy Chairman of Joint Chief of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces Brigadier General Massoud Jazayeri said on Monday.

The principal objective of Iran in the region is to defuse tensions, Jazayeri noted, adding that protecting and guaranteeing security in the Gulf are among the major defensive policies of the country.
However, should the country’s national interests come under threat, Iran’s armed forces will utilize their defensive capabilities to defend the country’s sovereignty, he said.

In a Sunday address in Tehran, Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast also described the strategic Strait of Hormuz, linking the Sea of Oman to the Gulf, as a crucial waterway for the global economy.

Mehmanparast emphasized that the strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world’s oil supply flows out, clearly explains why its security is of high priority for Iran. The senior diplomat insisted, however, that no foreign power should imagine that they can determine, for political ends, which states can and which ones can’t benefit from Gulf resources. He added that Tehran spares no effort to maintain security in the Gulf.

US Sends Letter to Iran on Strait of Hormuz Closure

Local Editor

Iran announced Sunday it received a letter regarding its threatening to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz from the US, but stopped short on the content of the letter.

“The US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, sent a letter to Mohammad Khazaie, Iran’s UN representative, which was conveyed by the Swiss ambassador, and finally Iraqi President Jalal Talabani delivered its contents to Iranian officials,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said, according to IRNA.

“We are in the process of studying the letter and if necessary we will respond.”

On Friday, the New York Times, citing unnamed US officials, reported that Washington had used a secret channel to warn Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khamenei that closing the narrow strategic waterway would cross a “red line” and provoke a response.

The Strait of Hormuz became the focal point of the recent escalation of tensions between Washington and Tehran with Iran warning that imposing sanctions against the energy sector will prompt it to prevent oil cargoes from passing through the strategic Strait.

Iran to Avenge Scientist Assassination: Larijani

Local Editor

Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani vowed Monday that the Islamic Republic will avenge the assassination of its nuclear scientist Mustapha Ahmadi Roshan, and stated that several arrests were made over the crime.

In an interview with the Iranian Arabic speaking news channel Al-Alam, Larijani said that “we have discovered some clues and some arrests have been made. Investigations are ongoing.”

“We will not hesitate in punishing the Zionist regime so that it realizes such actions have clear responses. There will definitely be a response,” he added, pointing out that the response would not be of a terrorist nature like this entity’s crimes.

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 this Blog!

Der Spiegel: ‘Syrian Navy chase German spy ship…’

uprootedpalestinians — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:33:00 +0000

Via FLC

“… The spokesman, Stefan Paris, said the Syrian vessel sped across the bow of the unarmed German ship Alster in the incident… He denied the Alster was a ‘spy boat,’ as reported by the news magazine Der Spiegel, saying it was one of three reconnaissance vessels serving the German strategic military intelligence command. It had been operating in international waters.
He could not release any ‘operational details’ on its ‘routine’ and ‘national’ mission.
The German Navy has separate vessels in the area on a UN mission to stop arms smuggling into Lebanon by sea. Der Spiegel said the Alster, with a crew of 85, had been operating in the eastern Mediterranean since early November. It said the incident happened 15 nautical miles off the Syrian coast.
The vessel has acoustic and optical sensors for intelligence gathering…”

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 this Blog!

America wants to manufacture a regime similar to Mubarak’s regime

uprootedpalestinians — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:19:00 +0000

Via Mohamadyousef’s Blog

Part 1
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 1

Part 2
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 2

Part 3
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 3

Part 4
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 4

Part 5
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 5

Part 6
سيف الدولة: أمريكا تريد صنع نظام علي غرار نظام مبارك – 6

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 this Blog!

The Practice of Ritual Defamation

uprootedpalestinians — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:04:00 +0000

http://www.lairdwilcox.com/news/defame.html

The Practice of Ritual Defamation

How values, opinions and beliefs are controlled in democratic societies.

By: Laird Wilcox

1990

Defamation is the destruction or attempted destruction of the reputation, status, character or standing in the community of a person or group of persons by unfair, wrongful, or malicious speech or publication. For the purposes of this essay, the central element is defamation in retaliation for the real or imagined attitudes, opinions or beliefs of the victim, with the intention of silencing or neutralizing his or her influence, and/or making an example of them so as to discourage similar independence and “insensitivity” or non-observance of taboos. It is different in nature and degree from simple criticism or disagreement in that it is aggressive, organized and skillfully applied, often by an organization or representative of a special interest group, and in that it consists of several characteristic elements.

Ritual Defamation is not ritualistic because it follows any prescribed religious or mystical doctrine, nor is it embraced in any particular document or scripture. Rather, it is ritualistic because it follows a predictable, stereotyped pattern which embraces a number of elements, as in a ritual.

The elements of a Ritual Defamation are these:

In a ritual defamation the victim must have violated a particular taboo in some way, usually by expressing or identifying with a forbidden attitude, opinion or belief. It is not necessary that he “do” anything about it or undertake any particular course of action, only that he engage in some form of communication or expression.

The method of attack in a ritual defamation is to assail the character of the victim, and never to offer more than a perfunctory challenge to the particular attitudes, opinions or beliefs expressed or implied. Character assassination is its primary tool.

An important rule in ritual defamation is to avoid engaging in any kind of debate over the truthfulness or reasonableness of what has been expressed, only condemn it. To debate opens the issue up for examination and discussion of its merits, and to consider the evidence that may support it, which is just what the ritual defamer is trying to avoid. The primary goal of a ritual defamation is censorship and repression.

The victim is often somebody in the public eye – someone who is vulnerable to public opinion – although perhaps in a very modest way. It could be a schoolteacher, writer, businessman, minor official, or merely an outspoken citizen. Visibility enhances vulnerability to ritual defamation.

An attempt, often successful, is made to involve others in the defamation. In the case of a public official, other public officials will be urged to denounce the offender. In the case of a student, other students will be called upon, and so on.

In order for a ritual defamation to be effective, the victim must be dehumanized to the extent that he becomes identical with the offending attitude, opinion or belief, and in a manner which distorts it to the point where it appears at its most extreme. For example, a victim who is defamed as a “subversive” will be identified with the worst images of subversion, such as espionage, terrorism or treason. A victim defamed as a “pervert” will be identified with the worst images of perversion, including child molestation and rape. A victim defamed as a “racist” or “anti-Semitic” will be identified with the worst images of racism or anti-Semitism, such as lynchings or gas chambers.

Also to be successful, a ritual defamation must bring pressure and humiliation on the victim from every quarter, including family and friends. If the victim has school children, they may be taunted and ridiculed as a consequence of adverse publicity. If they are employed, they may be fired from their job. If the victim belongs to clubs or associations, other members may be urged to expel them.

Any explanation the victim may offer, including the claim of being misunderstood, is considered irrelevant. To claim truth as a defense for a politically incorrect value, opinion or belief is interpreted as defiance and only compounds the problem. Ritual defamation is often not necessarily an issue of being wrong or incorrect but rather of “insensitivity” and failing to observe social taboos.

An interesting aspect of ritual defamation as a practice is its universality. It is not specific to any value, opinion or belief or to any group or subculture. It may be used for or against any political, ethnic, national or religious group. It may, for example, by anti-Semites against Jews, or by Jews against anti-Semites; by rightists against leftists or by leftists against rightists, and so on.

The power of ritual defamation lies entirely in its capacity to intimidate and terrorize. It embraces some elements of primitive superstitious belief, as in a “curse” or “hex.” It plays into the subconscious fear most people have of being abandoned or rejected by the tribe or by society and being cut off from social and psychological support systems.

The weakness of ritual defamation lies in its tendency toward overkill and in its obvious maliciousness. Occasionally a ritual defamation will fail because of poor planning and failure to correctly judge the vulnerability of the victim or because its viciousness inadvertently generates sympathy.

It’s important to recognize and identify the patterns of a ritual defamation. Like all propaganda and disinformation campaigns it is accomplished primarily through the manipulation of words and symbols. It is not used to persuade, but to punish. Although it may have cognitive elements, its thrust is primarily emotional. Ritual Defamation is used to hurt, to intimidate, to destroy, and to persecute, and to avoid the dialogue, debate and discussion upon which a free society depends. On those grounds it must be opposed no matter who tries to justify its use.

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Push To Grant Immunity To Military Generals

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:45:00 +0000

http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/hub.1326407570.html

http://connect.facebook.net/rsrc.php/v1/yD/r/GL74y29Am1r.swf

http://www.facebook.com/dialog/oauth?api_key=79439656165&app_id=79439656165&channel_url=https%3A%2F%2Fs-static.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fconnect%2Fxd_proxy.php%3Fversion%3D3%23cb%3Df2d701bc9048ae4%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.blogger.com%252Ff29fb5dda07bf44%26relation%3Dparent.parent%26transport%3Dpostmessage&client_id=79439656165&display=none&domain=www.blogger.com&locale=en_US&origin=1&redirect_uri=https%3A%2F%2Fs-static.ak.fbcdn.net%2Fconnect%2Fxd_proxy.php%3Fversion%3D3%23cb%3Df7077b386b9c0a%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.blogger.com%252Ff29fb5dda07bf44%26relation%3Dparent%26transport%3Dpostmessage%26frame%3Df7d9855be7f5bc&response_type=token%2Csigned_request%2Ccode&sdk=joey

One Day After A High Level US State Department Meeting, The Brotherhood Wants To Protect Egypt’s US-Supported Military Criminals From Prosecution

By John Glaser,

January 12, 2012

“Anti-War”

Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood say they plan to pass legislation granting immunity to the ruling military generals for crimes they have committed since taking power in February.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party won large majorities in a set of Egypt’s post-Mubarak democratic elections, but the prospects for civilian rule to take over are not so certain. Allegedly, they are trying to ease the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) out of power in exchange for immunity.

The influence of SCAF had helped oust former dictator Hosni Mubarak from power during last year’s revolution, but they have since renewed the state repression and violence against peaceful protesters so prevalent under Mubarak. The youth and Egypt’s leading secularists have been calling for SCAF to be prosecuted and punished for their crimes.

But now that may not happen. And it’s possible the shrewd politics from the Muslim Brotherhood is not the only reason. The Brotherhood has been on the side of the military junta more and more since the U.S. started talks with them in recent months. One day before this announcement to grant immunity, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns met with the head of the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party, Mohammed Morsi.It quite possible that the U.S. fears that legal action against the SCAF will put them in jeopardy as well. Amnesty International recently found that the U.S. has repeatedly shipped weapons – including ammunition and riot gear – to SCAF despite the violent crackdown on protesters. U.S. support for SCAF has remained assertive even as it rolled back progress toward democracy in post-Mubarak Egypt.

Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter also recently met with SCAF leader Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi. ”Full civilian control is a little excessive, I think,” Carter was quoted as saying after the meeting. ”I don’t think the SCAF is going to turn over full responsibility to the civilian government. There are going to be some privileges of the military that would probably be protected,” Carter added.

The attempt to unseat contested Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh also faced similar questions of immunity. But U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay denounced it as illegal: “International law and the UN policy are clear on the matter: amnesties are not permissible if they prevent the prosecution of individuals who may be criminally responsible for international crimes including war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and gross violations of human rights.”

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 this Blog!

Beating the Drums of War: Provoking Iran into "Firing the First Shot"?

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:42:00 +0000

Global Research, January 14, 2012

by Michel Chossudovsky

[Author's Note: SAY NO TO WAR ON IRAN, Spread the word, forward this article, post it on Facebook. Our objective at Global Research is to curb the flow of media disinformation, reverse the tide of war and restore World peace.]

Introduction

While the possibility of a war with Iran is acknowledged in US news reports, its regional and global implications are barely analyzed.

Very few people in America are aware or informed regarding the devastation and massive loss of life which would occur in the case of a US-Israeli sponsored attack on Iran.

The media is involved in a deliberate process of camouflage and distortion.

War preparations under a “Global Strike” Concept, centralized and coordinated by US Strategic Command (STRATCOM) are not front page news in comparison to the most insignificant issues of public concern, including the local level crime scene or the tabloid gossip reports on Hollywood celebrities.

The “Globalization of War” involving the hegemonic deployment of a formidable US-NATO military force in all major regions of the World is inconsequential in the eyes of the Western media.

The broader implications of this war are either trivialized or not mentioned. People are led to believe that war is part of a “humanitarian mandate” and that both Iran as well as Iran’s allies, namely China and Russia, constitute an unrelenting threat to global security and “Western democracy”.

While the most advanced weapons system are used, America’s wars are never presented as “killing operations” resulting in extensive civilian casualties.

While the incidence of “collateral damage” is acknowledged, US-led wars are heralded as an unquestionable instrument of “peace-making” and “democratization”.

This twisted notion that waging war is “a worthy cause”, becomes entrenched in the inner consciousness of millions of people. A framework of “good versus evil” overshadows an understanding of the causes and devastating consequences of war.

Within this mindset, realities as well as concepts are turned upside down. War becomes peace. The lie becomes the truth. The humanitarian mandate of the Pentagon and NATO cannot be challenged.

When “going after the bad guys”, in the words of president Obama, “no options can be taken off the table”. An inquisitorial doctrine similar to that of the Spanish Inquisition, prevails. People are no longer allowed to think.

Iran is a country of close to 80 million people. It constitutes a major and significant regional military and economic power. It has ten percent of global oil and gas reserves, more than five times those of the United States of America.

The conquest of Iran’s oil riches is the driving force behind America’s military agenda. Iran’s oil and gas industry is the unspoken trophy of the US led war, which has been on the active drawing board of the Pentagon for the last nine years.

While the US is on a war footing, Iran has –for more than ten years– been actively developing its military capabilities in the eventuality of a US sponsored attack.

If hostilities were to break out between Iran and the Western military alliance, this could trigger a regional war extending from the Mediterranean to the Chinese border, potentially leading humanity into the realm of a World War III scenario.

The Russian government, in a recent statement, has warned the US and NATO that “should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security.” What this signifies is that Russia is Iran’s military ally and that Russia will act militarily if Iran is attacked.

Military Deployment

Iran is the target of US-Israel-NATO war plans.

Advanced weapons systems have been deployed.

US and allied Special Forces as well as intelligence operatives are already on the ground inside Iran. US military drones are involved in spying and reconnaissance activities.

Bunker buster B61 tactical nuclear weapons are slated to be used against Iran in retaliation for its alleged nuclear weapons program. Ironically, in the words of US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Iran does not possess a nuclear weapons program. “Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No.”

The risk of armed hostilities between the US-Israel led coalition and Iran is, according to Israeli military analysts “dangerously close”.

There has been a massive deployment of troops which have been dispatched to the Middle East, not to mention the redeployment of US and allied troops previously stationed in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Nine thousand US troops have been dispatched to Israel to participate in what is described by the Israeli press as the largest joint air defense war exercise in Israeli history, The drill, called “Austere Challenge 12,” is scheduled to take place within the next few weeks Its stated purpose “is to test multiple Israeli and US air defense systems, especially the “Arrow” system, which the country specifically developed with help from the US to intercept Iranian missiles.”

Reports also suggest a substantial increase in the number of reservists who are being deployed to the Middle East. Reports confirm that reservist US Air Force personnel have been dispatched to military bases in South West Asia (Persian Gulf). From Minnesota more than 120 Airmen including pilots, navigators, mechanics, etc. departed for the Middle East on January 8. Reservist US air force personnel from bases in North Carolina and Georgia “expect to deploy with their units in coming months“. (See fayobserver.com December 18, 2011)

Reserve units from the US Coastguard have also been dispatched to the Middle East.(Coast Guard Reservists Head to Middle East military.com, January 5, 2012)

From these local reports, however, it is impossible to establish the overall (net) increase of US reservists from different divisions of the US military, who have been assigned to “operation Iran war”.

Army reservists from the UK are also been sent to the Middle East.

US Troops to Israel and the Persian Gulf

Israel has become a de facto US military outpost. US and Israeli command structures are being integrated, with close consultations between the Pentagon and Israel’s Ministry of Defense.

A large number of US troops will be stationed in Israel once the war games are completed. The assumption of this military deployment is the staging of a joint US-Israeli air attack on Iran. Military escalation towards a regional war is part of the military scenario:

Thousands of US troops began descending on Israel this week. … many would be staying up to the end of the year as part of the US-IDF deployment in readiness for a military engagement with Iran and its possible escalation into a regional conflict. They will be joined by a US aircraft carrier. The warplanes on its decks will fly missions with Israeli Air Force jets. The 9,000 US servicemen gathering in Israel in the coming weeks are mostly airmen, missile interceptor teams, marines, seamen, technicians and intelligence officers.

…

Tehran too is walking a taut tightrope. It is staging military’s maneuvers every few days to assuring the Iranian people that its leaders are fully prepared to defend the country against an American or Israeli strike on its national nuclear program. By this stratagem, Iran’s ground, sea and air forces are maintained constantly at top war readiness to thwart any surprise attack.

The joint US-Israeli drill will test multiple Israeli and US air defense systems against incoming missiles and rockets, according to the official communiqué. (DEBKAfile, January 6, 2012)

Meanwhile, the Pentagon has dispatched some 15,000 US troops in Kuwait. These consist of two Army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit. Moreover, the US Navy is retaining two aircraft carriers with their respective strike groups on standby in the Arabian sea, the USS Carl Vinson and the USS John Stennis. (Debka, January 13, 2012).

An impressive deployment of troops and advanced military hardware is unfolding.

In recent developments, a third aircraft carrier, the USS Abraham Lincoln, is heading towards the Arabian Sea. Britain’s Royal Navy has dispatched her newest and most advanced warship, Type 45 destroyer HMS Daring, “which has a “stealth” design to help avoid detection by radar”. France has sent its Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier.

The Western media has barely mentioned these deployments of troops and military hardware: “The latest deployment [of US troops to Kuwait], which was ushered in without much presentation to the public, adds a huge number of troops aligned with America’s arsenal that are now surrounding Iran on literally every front” (Russia Today, US Stations 15,000 troops to Kuwait, January 13, 2012, emphasis added).

Is this massive deployment of US troops to Israel and the Gulf States related to the withdrawal and redeployment of US troops previously stationed in Iraq? The troops stationed in Kuwait will operate under the auspices of US Central Command

Britain’s HMS Daring

Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier
War Games

US-Israel Missile defense and naval war games are being conducted simultaneously.

Meanwhile, Iran has announced that it will be conducting its own war games in the Persian Gulf in February.

Meanwhile, The Islamic Republic of Iran is also on a war footing. Iran’s Armed Forces is in an advanced stage of preparedness to defend the country’s borders as well as retaliate against a US-Israel led attack. Iran has completed a 10-day naval exercise near the Strait of Hormuz in December. It has now announced that it is planning new naval drills codenamed “The Great Prophet”, which are slated to take place in February.

Iran’s December war games involved the test firing of two long range missiles systems, including the Qadar (a powerful sea-to-shore missile) and the Nour surface-to-surface missile. “According to Iranian state news, the Nour is an ‘advanced radar-evading, target-seeking, guided and controlled missile’.” (See The Pentagon to Send US Troops to Israel. Iran is the Unspoken Target, Global Research, January 4, 20122

“Additionally, the Iranian military reportedly test-fired numerous other short, medium and long-range missiles…. Iranian authorities reported that they test-fired the medium-range, surface-to-air, radar-evading Mehrab missile.” (Ibid)

Iranian Missile Tests

The crucial question: Is the Pentagon seeking to deliberately trigger a military confrontation in the Persian Gulf with a view to providing a pretext and a justification to waging an all out war on the Islamic Republic of Iran?

US military strategists admit that the US Navy would be at disadvantage in relation to Iranian forces in the narrow corridor of the Strait of Hormuz:

“Despite its might and shear strength, geography literally works against U.S. naval power in the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. The relative narrowness of the Persian Gulf makes it like a channel, at least in a strategic and military context. Figuratively speaking, the aircraft carriers and warships of the U.S. are confined to narrow waters or are closed in within the coastal waters of the Persian Gulf. … Even the Pentagon’s own war simulations have shown that a war in the Persian Gulf with Iran would spell disaster for the United States and its military. (Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The Geo-Politics of the Strait of Hormuz: Could the U.S. Navy be defeated by Iran in the Persian Gulf?, Global Research, January 8, 2012)

Triggering a War Pretext Incident: Provoking Iran to “Throw the First Punch”

Is the Obama administration prepared to sacrifice one or more vessels of the Fifth Fleet, resulting in extensive casualties among soldiers and sailors, with a view to mustering public support for a war on Iran on the grounds of self-defense?

As documented by Richard Sanders, the strategy of triggering a war pretext incident has been used throughout American military history.

“Throughout history, war planners have used various forms of deception to trick their enemies. Because public support is so crucial to the process of initiating and waging war, the home population is also subject to deceitful stratagems. The creation of false excuses to justify going to war is a major first step in constructing public support for such deadly ventures. Perhaps the most common pretext for war is an apparently unprovoked enemy attack. Such attacks, however, are often fabricated, incited or deliberately allowed to occur. They are then exploited to arouse widespread public sympathy for the victims, demonize the attackers and build mass support for military “retaliation.”

Like schoolyard bullies who shout ‘He hit me first!’, war planners know that it is irrelevant whether the opponent really did ‘throw the first punch.’ As long as it can be made to appear that the attack was unprovoked, the bully receives license to ‘respond’ with force. Bullies and war planners are experts at taunting, teasing and threatening their opponents. If the enemy cannot be goaded into ‘firing the first shot,’ it is easy enough to lie about what happened. Sometimes, that is sufficient to rationalize a schoolyard beating or a genocidal war.

Such trickery has probably been employed by every military power throughout history. During the Roman empire, “the cause for war” — casus belli — was often invented to conceal the real reasons for war. Over the millennia, although weapons and battle strategies have changed greatly, the deceitful strategem of using pretext incidents to ignite war has remained remarkably consistent. (See How to Start a War: The American Use of War Pretext Incidents. Global research, January 9, 2012)

Pearl Harbor stands out as the casus belli, the pretext and justification for America’s entry into World War II.

President Roosevelt knew that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked by Japan and did nothing to prevent it. At a November 25 1941 meeting of FDR’s war council, “Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s notes speak of the prevailing consensus: ‘The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into … firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.’” (See Patrick Buchanan, Did FDR Provoke Pearl Harbor? Global Research, December 7, 2011).

In the wake of the attack, America was beating the drums of war, while also concealing the fact that “the FDR administration knew, but failed to act”.

“A massive cover-up followed Pearl Harbor a few days later, … when the Chief of Staff ordered a lid put on the affair. ‘Gentlemen,’ he told half a dozen officers, ‘this goes to the grave with us.’” (John Toland, Infamy: Pearl Harbor and its Aftermath, Doubleday, 1982, p. 321).

According to Professor Francis Boyle with reference to the ongoing showdown between the US Navy and Iran in the Persian Gulf: “Once again, it looks to me like what FDR did in 1941 when he sacrificed the Pacific Fleet and its men at Pearl Harbor—except for the carriers—in order to get the USA into World War II despite the fervent desire of the American People and Congress to stay out. Déjà vu all over again. Back to the Future “ (Francis Boyle, January 13, 2011, email communication to author)

In contrast to the events of November 1941, the US Congress in 2012 is broadly supportive of waging a war on Iran and the American people are, as a result of media disinformation, largely unaware of the devastating implications of a US-Israeli attack. .

Thematic Justifications: Demonizing the Enemy

Apart from the “incident” whereby the enemy is incited to “throw the first punch”, “thematic justifications” are used to demonize the enemy and justify a casus belli. WMD and regime change in the case of Iraq (2003), support to Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks in the case of Afghanistan (2001), “regime change” and “democratization” as in the cases of Yugoslavia (1999) and Libya (2011).

The thematic justifications to wage war on Iran include the following:

1. Iran is accused of developing a nuclear weapons program, 2. Iran is a “Rogue State” which defies the “international community” and constitutes a threat to the Western World, 3. Iran wants “to wipe Israel off the map”, 4. Iran is responsible for supporting and abetting the 9/11 terrorist attacks, 5. Iran is an authoritarian and undemocratic country thereby justifying a “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) intervention with a view to instating democracy.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States

In case of a war with Iran, NATO member states as well as NATO partners of the “Mediterranean Dialogue” including the Five GCC Gulf States, Saudi Arabia, Jordan would be involved.

Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States have a formidable weapons arsenal of F-15 combat planes, patriot missiles, Apache helicopters and warships (Made in America), which would be used against Iran on behalf of the US led coalition. (see The Gulf Military Balance in 2010: An Overview | Center for Strategic and International Studies)

The US has more than 30 military bases and facilities including its naval base in Bahrain, US Central command (CENTCOM) headquarters in Qatar, not to mention its military installations in Pakistan, Turkey and Afghanistan (see maps)

Click to enlarge

* US military base or facility surrounding Iran

From Washington’s standpoint, Saudi Arabia’s Royal Air Force is meant to act as a proxy for the USAF, operating on the principle of “interoperability”.

Saudi Arabia’s Air Force is equipped with the most advanced combat planes including (among others) the Eurofighter Typhoons, Tornado IDS, F-15 and F-15E Eagle fighters.

In October 2010, Washington announced its largest arms sale in US history, a $60.5 billion purchase by Saudi Arabia. These weapons although acquired by Saudi Arabia are de facto part of a US sponsored weapons arsenal, which is to be used in close coordination and consultation with the Pentagon. Large arms sales were also negotiated in 2010 with the Gulf States.

It should, nonetheless, be emphasised that there is reluctance within the ruling Saudi and Gulf States elites, to actively participating in a regional war, which would inevitably lead to Iranian retaliatory aerial attacks.

Escalation: Towards a Broader Regional War

If aerial attacks were to be launched, Iran would retaliate with missile attacks directed against Israel as well as against US military facilities in the Persian Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iran has an advanced Russian S 300 air defense system. It is equipped with medium and long range missile capabilities: The Shahab 3 and Sejjil missiles have a range of approximately 2,000 km, enabling them to strike targets in Israel. The Ghadr 1 has a range of 1,800 km. (See Haaretz, September 28, 2009)

The war with Iran would not be limited to aerial bombardments. A land war could follow with Turkey playing a strategic military role on behalf of the US-Israel led coalition.

Turkey’s ground forces are of the order of 500,000. Iran’s are of a similar order of magnitude: 465,000 regular forces. Turkish forces would be deployed in border areas with Iran as well as in Northern Syria.

Iran’s Air Force and Navy personnel are respectively of the order of 52,000 and 28,000. (see Table below)

The Revolutionary Guards, which constitute Iran’s elite forces, are of the order of 120,000. Moreover, Iran has a significant paramilitary force of several million men and women called the Basij. The war would also overflow into Syria (which is an ally of Iran), Palestine, Lebanon and Jordan involving the participation of Syrian ground forces as well as Hezbollah, which effectively repealed Israel’s 2006 invasion of Lebanon. In recent developments, Iran has increased its military aid to Syria and Lebanon.

In turn, Russia has a naval base in Southern Syria and military cooperation agreements with both Syria and Iran, involving the presence of Russian military advisers.

Russia is deploying warships out of its naval base in Tartus including aircraft carrying missile cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov. “The deployment … follows the US move to station the George H.W. Bush Carrier Strike Group” off the Syrian coastline. (See M. K. Badrakumar, Russia deploying warships in Syria – Indian Punchline, November 21, 2011)

Russia’s Naval base in Tartus, Syria

Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier

Su 33 take-off from aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov in the Eastern Mediterranean

UN Security Council Resolution 1929 (June 2010) had imposed a sanctions regime on Iran which was conducive to a temporary freeze in military cooperation between Iran and Russia, as well as with China. In recent developments, it would appear that military cooperation has de facto resumed following the rebuff by both China and Russia of the December 31, 2011 economic sanctions regime imposed by Washington.

In a scenario of military escalation, Iranian troops and/or Special Forces would cross the border into Afghanistan and Iraq.

From the three existing war theaters: Afghanistan -Pakistan (Af-Pak), Iraq, Palestine, the onslaught of a war on Iran would lead to an integrated regional war.

The entire Middle East-Central Asian region extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to China’s Western frontier with Afghanistan and Pakistan would flare up, from the tip of the Arabian Peninsula to the Caspian Sea basin.

The Caucasus and Central Asia: Competing Military Alliances

What would be the involvement of America’s “partners” in the Caucasus, namely Georgia and Azerbaijan? (See Michel Chossudovsky, The Iran War Theater’s “Northern Front”: Azerbaijan and the US Sponsored War on Iran, Global Research, April 9, 2007).

In Azerbaijan, the government has recently distanced itself from Washington, and has turned down its participation in joint military exercises with the US.

The bilateral US-Azerbaijan strategic agreement is said to be stagnating:

“Baku’s desire to not to anger Moscow would seem to preclude any possibility of Azerbaijan hosting a US military facility….” (Azerbaijan: US Military Ties with Baku Are Stagnating – Experts | EurasiaNet.org, April 25, 2011).

In contrast, the Georgian government is directly supporting America’s war effort against Iran. In recent developments, the Pentagon is sponsoring the construction of makeshift US military hospitals in Georgia to be used in the eventuality of a war with Iran. ( Readies for War On Iran: US Builds Military Hospitals in Georgia, Global Research, January 10, 2012)

“These are 20-bed hospitals…It’s an American project. A big war between the US and Iran is beginning in the Persian Gulf. $5 billion was allocated for the construction of these 20-bed military hospitals,” Javelidze said in an interview with Georgian paper Kviris Kronika (News of the Week) … The construction is mainly paid from the American pocket. In addition, airports are being briskly built in Georgia… (Ibid)

What the military hospitals project conveys is that the Pentagon has already established detailed logistics pertaining to the transfer of wounded US servicemen from the Iran battlefield to nearby military hospitals in Georgia. These advanced preparations suggest that war plans are at a very advanced stage and that scenarios pertaining to military casualties have been established.

Military Alliances: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the CSTO

The countervailing military alliance to the US-NATO-Israel axis is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) as well as the overlapping Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The SCO includes Kazakhstan, the People’s Republic of China, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tajikistan and the Republic of Uzbekistan. The SCO includes seven former Soviet republics including Russia, Belarus, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. Iran has observer status in the SCO.

Uzbekistan withdrew from the NATO sponsored GUUAM military cooperation agreement. In 2005, it formally evicted the US from the Karshi-Khanabad air base, known as K2 (U.S. Evicted From Air Base In Uzbekistan, Washington Post, July 30, 2005).

Of significance, in the Kyrgyz Republic, the new elected President Almazbek Atambayev (November 2011) stated that he intends to close down the US military base at Manas when the lease expires. (Kyrgyzstan Says United States’ Manas Air Base Will Close – NYTimes.com, November, 1, 2011)

What these developments suggest is that the former Soviet republics of Central Asia have reaffirmed their relationship to Moscow, which in turn has led the consolidation of the SCO-CSTO military bloc.

Global US Military Hegemony. Russia and China

The participation of Russia and China on the side of Iran is already de facto in view of prevailing military cooperation agreements. the transfer of weapons systems and technology to Iran, as well as the presence of Russian military advisers, training personnel, in both Iran and Syria. Moreover, Iran has Observer status in the SCO

Russia and China are fully aware that a war on Iran is a stepping stone towards a broader war. Both countries are targeted by the US and NATO. Russia is threatened on its border with the European Union, with US-NATO AMD targetted at major Russian cities. With the exception of its Northern frontier, China is surrounded by US military bases, from the Korean peninsula to the South China Sea.

Both China and Russia are perceived by Washington as a “Global Threat”. China has been the target of veiled threats by President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The recent National Defense Review announced by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, envisages an expanded defense budget, with a view to containing Russia and China.

In recent development, Russia newly appointed Deputy Prime Minister Dmitri Rogozin has warned Washington and Brussels that “Should anything happen to Iran, should Iran get drawn into any political or military hardships, this will be a direct threat to our national security,”

Spiralling US Defense Spending: The Pentagon’s “Big Dog” Ideology

Washington’s objective is to establish global military dominance. While the “war on terrorism” and the containment of “rogue states” still constitute the official justification and driving force, China and Russia have been tagged in US military and National Security documents as potential enemies:

“… the U.S. military … is seeking to dissuade rising powers, such as China, from challenging U.S. military dominance.” (See Greg Jaffe, Rumsfeld details big military shift in new document, The Wall Street Journal, 11 March 2005)

How does Washington intend to reach its goal of global military hegemony?

Through spiralling defense spending and the continued growth of the US weapons industry, requiring a massive compression of all categories of government expenditure.

Implemented at the crossroads of the most serious economic crisis in American history, the ongoing increase in defense spending feeds this new undeclared arms race with China and Russia, with vast amounts of tax dollars channelled to America’s defense contractors.

“The stated objective is to make the process of developing advanced weapons systems “so expensive”, that no other power on earth including China and Russia will able to compete or challenge “the Big Dog”, without jeopardizing its civilian economy” Michel Chossudovsky, New Undeclared Arms Race:, Global Research, March 17, 2005)

This “Big Dog” ideology, a term coined by the Pentagon, is a precondition for the “Globalization of War”. It is a diabolical agenda of enhancing America’s killing machine by dismantling social programs and impoverishing people across the US.

“[A]t the core of this strategy is the belief that the US must maintain such a large lead in crucial [military] technologies that growing powers [ Russia, China, Iran] will conclude that it is too expensive for these countries to even think about trying to run with the big dog. They will realize that it is not worth sacrificing their economic growth, said one defense consultant who was hired to draft sections of the document.” (Greg Jaffe, Rumsfeld details big military shift in new document, The Wall Street Journal, March 11, 2005)

Related Articles

	The Globalization of War: The “Military Roadmap” to World War III ONLINE INTERACTIVE READER - by Michel Chossudovsky, Finian Cunningham – 2012-01-31
	The Pentagon’s global military design is one of world conquest. The military deployment of US-NATO forces is occurring in several regions of the world simultaneously.

	When War Games Go Live. Preparing to Attack Iran. “Simulating World War III” - by Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-01-08
	With ongoing war games on both sides, armed hostilities between the US-Israel led coalition and Iran are, according to Israeli military analysts, “dangerously close”.

	SYRIA: British Special Forces, CIA and MI6 Supporting Armed Insurgency. NATO Intervention Contemplated - by Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-01-07

THE WAR ON IRAN: The Deployment of Thousands of US Troops to Israel, The Integration of US-Israeli Command Structures

- by Michel Chossudovsky – 2012-01-04

ANNEX

THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN: MILITARY CAPABILITIES

Total Population: 77,891,220 [2011]

Available Manpower: 46,247,556 [2011]

Fit for Military Service: 39,556,497 [2011]

Of Military Age: 1,392,483 [2011]

Active Military: 545,000 [2011]

Active Reserve: 650,000 [2011]

LAND ARMY

Total Land Weapons: 12,393

Tanks: 1,793 [2011]

Armoured Personnel Carrier/Infantry Fighting Vehicles (APC/IFV): 1,560 [2011]

Towed Artillery: 1,575 [2011]

SPGs: 865 [2011]

MLRSs: 200 [2011]

Mortars: 5,000 [2011]

Anti Tank (AT) Weapons: 1,400 [2011]

Anti-Aerial (AA) Weapons: 1,701 [2011]

Logistical Vehicles: 12,000

AIR POWER

Total Aircraft: 1,030 [2011]

Helicopters: 357 [2011]

Serviceable Airports: 319 [2011]

NAVAL POWER

Total Navy Ships: 261

Merchant Marine Strength: 74 [2011]

Major Ports & Terminals: 3 Aircraft Carriers: 0 [2011]

Destroyers: 3 [2011]

Submarines: 19 [2011]

Frigates: 5 [2011]

Patrol Craft: 198 [2011]

Mine Warfare Craft: 7 [2011]

Amphibious Assault Craft: 26 [2011]

SOURCES:

http://www.iraniandefence.com/iran-army/

and http://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.asp?country_id=Iran

Michel Chossudovsky is an award-winning author, Professor of Economics (emeritus) at the University of Ottawa. He is the Founder and Director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), Montreal and Editor of the globalresearch.ca website. He is the author of The Globalization of Poverty and The New World Order (2003) and America’s “War on Terrorism”(2005). His most recent book is entitled Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War (2011). He has taught as Visiting Professor at universities in Western Europe, South East Asia, Latin America and the Pacific. He has acted as an adviser to governments of developing countries and has worked as a consultant for the several international organizations. Prof. Chossudovsky is a signatory of the Kuala Lumpur declaration to criminalize war and recipient of the Human Rights Prize of the Society for the Protection of Civil Rights and Human Dignity (GBM), Berlin, Germany. He is also a contributor to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. His writings have been published in more than twenty languages.

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 this Blog!

"Chosen", so they can!

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:39:00 +0000

Chosenness: Are Palestinians and their supporters entitled to KNOW about such wicked supremacist ideology? oh YES we are

“Chosen”, so they can: Immigration officials blast bill to let Jewish tourists [terrorists] live in Israel indefinitely [some "supporters" want to IMPOSE on Palestinians to embrace such robbers and land thieves!]

Happy New Year from IDF

US mass murderer, Christopher Kyle, who killed over 250 Muslims…….>>>

>>>> Awarded highest “Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs” Award

Entire Iraq War was Illegal war of aggression, based on lies provided by “Israel” the “light unto the nations”

The Ideological IDF

The “Only Democracy” in the Middle East

Netanyahu meets the Rebbe and asks for his blessings

Netanyahu quotes Lubavitcher Rebbe at UN assembly

Netanyahu and the Rebbe Schneerson

Amr Moussa Urges Arab League to Mull Sending Troops to Syria

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 19:36:00 +0000

Local Editor

The shortest way to presidency

Arab League former Secretary General, Amr Moussa, called on Sunday for discussing the Qatari proposal to send troops to Syria.

Moussa, who is also an Egyptian Presidential hopeful, described the Qatarai proposal as “very important”.

“The Arab League should begin to study this possibility and begin consultations on this issue”, Moussa said in Beirut on the sidelines of a U.N.-organized conference on democracy in the Arab world.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, left,
and Arab League Secretary-General
Amr Moussa during a crisis summit on
Libyain in Paris. (AP Picture)

Speaking to reporters at the “Reform and Transitions to Democracy” organized by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), Moussa reiterated the widespread call for an end to violence in Syria.

“We are all against the use of force against citizens. Bloodshed does not bode well,” he said, describing the situation in Syria as “dangerous”.

A day earlier, Qatar’s emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani said he favors sending Arab troops to Syria to stop the unrest.

Sheikh Hamad is the first Arab leader to publicly call for Arab troops to be deployed in Syria, where the UN estimates more than 5,000 people have been killed in the crackdown since mid-March last year.

The comments by the emir, whose wealthy nation once enjoyed cordial ties with Damascus, come with the Arab League set to review the work of its Syria monitoring mission later this month, amid increasing concern about its failure to end the violence.


Source: Agencies

Qatar Emir Call For Troops In Syria Is Two Month Old

NATO denies military intervention plans in Syria, January 13 2012
“At present, there is no discussion at all of a NATO role with respect to Syria,” NATO spokeswoman Carmen Romero told Xinhua by phone.

Haven’t we seen such before? Oh, yeah:

NATO has no plans to intervene in Libya: Rasmussen, February 24 2011
“I would like to stress that NATO has no plans to intervene and we have not received any request,” Rasmussen said after talks with Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych.

We documented the Rassmussen/NATO headlines which followed after the one above.
But there is another more curious headline that ran yesterday: Emir of Qatar calls for Arab troops in Syria

The Emir of Qatar says that Arab troops should be sent to Syria to stop a deadly crackdown that has claimed the lives of thousands of people in the past ten month.Sheik Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani’s comments to CBS “60 Minutes”, which will be aired Sunday, are the first statements by an Arab leader calling for the deployment of troops inside Syria.

That dictator emir was also the one who pressed arranged for the Arab League to invite NATO to attack Libya.

But what is really curious here (and what only Qatar’s AlJazeera(!) reports) is that the CBS interview is old:

In an interview due to be aired on Sunday with US broadcaster CBS for the news programme 60 Minutes, Sheikh Hamad was asked if he was in favour of Arab nations intervening, to which he replied: “For such a situation to stop the killing … some troops should go to stop the killing.”The interview was recorded in mid-November.

Why and on who’s request did CBS hold back this interview for two month?
Were the preparations not yet finished for the NATO intervention in Syria? Was some additional time needed to make the Arab League observer mission fail to convince other Arab states to agree to the next war phase?

The interview was given after Syria in early November agreed to an Arab league cease fire plan which the rebels immediately rejected. “Western” news by now is always forgetting that last point. Despite continuing attacks from the opposition the Syrian government has largely followed the agreement, pulled back tanks, released prisoners and is implementing reforms. The observer mission was agreed to on December 19. Unless renewed it will run out in five days.

But it seems that all along the plan was not to allow for a peaceful solution for Syria. Why else would the Emir of Qatar, in an interview for the U.S. public, call for troops to attack Syria back in mid November?

Russia now anticipates an imminent wider war in the Middle East and is preparing its options.

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 this Blog!

Mossad saves Israeli tourists from Hizbullah in Thailand

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 17:15:00 +0000

Mossad saves Israeli tourists from Hizbullah in Thailand

Posted on January 16, 2012 | Leave a comment

First the good news. Seven Israeli Jews were saved from the doomed Italian cruise ship near coast of Tuscany. Three people were killed while there is no word on the fate of 100 American passengers. According to Israel Hasbara Committee on internet – the cruise ship was torpedo by Iranian Navy.
Now the bad news. Mossad had informed their friends in Thai intelligence that three Hizbullah members will arrive in Bangkok to pull a terrorist act against Israeli Jews. Following the tip, Thai police arrested Atris Hussein, a Swedish citizen at Suvarnabhumi Airport on Friday. Late on Friday night police released a sketch of a man suspected of entering Thailand to launch terrorist attacks, which prompted the US, Israel and other eight western embassies to issue travel warnings to their citizens.
The travel warnings have upset Thai Foreign Minister Surapong Tovichakchaikul, who said yesterday he was “disappointed that embassies have not consulted the Foreign Ministry according to diplomatic convention before issuing the warnings.”
According to Mossad, the Hizbullah hitmen plan to target Israeli tourists ahead of coming fourth anniversary of the assassination of Hizbullah leader Imad Mughniyeh (February 12). Last month, Israeli daily The Jerusalem Post had reported that Israel Occupation Force (IOF) has beefed-up security around former IOF chief Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi and former Mossad chief Gen. Meir Dagan who are expected to be Hizbullah’s assassination targets – even though, Hizbullah has never killed an Israeli leader so far.
According to the Thai media, Israel first informed the Thai authorities on December 22 that three Hezbollah operatives had entered the country in order to perpetrate terror attacks. On January 8, Israel received additional information pinpointing this weekend as the time of the attack.
Howevery, as a Zionist miracle – no attack happened as there were no Hizbullah or Iranian hitmen in Thailand. It was another Christmas Eve-type CIA-Mossad false flag operation involving Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
In the past, Israeli agents have been busted for killing tourists and stealing their IDs in Thailand, Canada, New Zealand, Turkey, Australia, etc.
Even though Tel Aviv is home to 280 Jewish brothels – Thailand attracts tens of thousands of tourists from Israel each year. The greatest majority of them go there to visit Pattaya, a hub of Thai prostitution industry. Bangkok has a number of Israeli-owned hotels for Jewish tourists. Guy Brucker, a former member of Israel Air Force commando unit Shaldog, told Israeli daily Ha’aretz (November 30, 2008) why so many Israelis visit Bangkok?
“You see how we have a culture of personal glorification, of saying that who you are is related to the occupation of the other. This is how people grow, through the subjugation of others. It’s possible to see this in the way we don’t acknowledge what is happening in Gaza or the failures of the Second Lebanon War. We see these as the result of us not finishing the job, because the resistance of the prostitute was too strong. She said there was a limit to how much you can trample on her.”

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 this Blog!

Archbishop Hanna: Targeting Syria Aims at Dividing Arab Nation, Liquidating Palestinian Issue

uprootedpalestinians — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 15:12:00 +0000

Jan 15, 2012

OCCUPIED JERUSALEM, (SANA) - Archbishop of the Sebastian Roman Orthodox Church, Attallah Hanna, affirmed that the US-Zionist scheme targeting Syria, aided by some regional parties, is a new Sykes-Picot project aiming at dividing the Arab nation and liquidating the Palestinian cause.

In an interview with the Syrian TVon Saturday, Archbishop Hanna expressed the Palestinian people’s solidarity with the Syrian people in the face of the heinous conspiracy targeting its national and pan-Arab stances, asserting that Syrian is the only resistant country in the region which stands by the Palestinian cause.

He expressed hope to see “the renewable Syria”, which President al-Assad talked about.. Syria, strong, stable, civilized, democratic and civil country.”
H. Zain/ M. Ismael

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 this Blog!