Monday, October 3, 2011

Panetta and Obama Administration joins the bullies

FRESNO ZIONISM
 Monday, October 3rd, 2011
Obama Administration joins the bullies
Schoolyard bullies (from the film "Back to the Future"). Why is the Obama Administration joining them?
Schoolyard bullies (from the film "Back to the Future"). Why is the Obama Administration joining them?
The Obama Administration has joined the schoolyard bullies:
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Sunday that Israel is becoming increasingly isolated in the Middle East, The Associated Press reported.
Panetta added Israel must restart negotiations with the Palestinian Authority and work to restore relations with Egypt and Turkey.
Panetta made the comments as he was traveling to Israel, saying the ongoing upheaval in the Middle East makes it critical for the Israelis to find ways to communicate with other nations in the region in order to have stability.
“There’s not much question in my mind that they maintain that (military) edge,” AP quoted Panetta as having told reporters traveling with him. “But the question you have to ask: Is it enough to maintain a military edge if you’reisolating yourself in the diplomatic arena? Real security can only be achieved by both a strong diplomatic effort as well as a strong effort to project your military strength.” –  (my emphasis)

Let’s compare the implications of Panetta’s remarks to reality:
“Israel must restart negotiations.” Why is the onus on Israel?  It was the Palestinian Authority (PA) that broke off negotiations and then violated the agreements it had signed by seeking UN sanction for a unilateral declaration of statehood. It was the PA that insisted on one precondition after another, and Israel that agreed to talk without preconditions.

Making Israel give in to PA demands on the grounds that then there will be productive negotiations has exactly the opposite effect. The Arabs pocket the latest concession and demand more. Negotiations are never ‘productive’ because the PA will never agree to end the conflict.

“Israel must work to restore relations with Egypt and Turkey.” This is Kafkaesque. A terrorist attack which killed 7 Israelis was launched from Egyptian territory, Egyptian soldiers or police murdered at least one of the victims and were themselves killed when the Israelis returned fire. Israel apologized — for self-defense — and had its embassy destroyed, and barely avoided having security officers who were trapped inside ripped to bloody bits. Now Israel needs to “work” to restore relations? With a country that while allegedly ‘at peace’ with it, continues its vicious incitement against Jews and Israel?

In fact, why hasn’t the US suggested to Egypt that in return for the billions in aid it gets every year, maybe it should stop being the biggest purveyor of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hate in the world? This has been going on for decades.

And Turkey — whose leader has systematically tried to humiliate Israel since he took power almost 10 years ago, whose campaign climaxed with the intentional provocation of a bloody incident in the Mediterranean, who has gone as far as to threaten acts of war against Israel when even the usually-pliant UN said that Israel was justified in its actions — what kind of self-abnegation does the Obama Administration expect from Israel and what makes them think it would make Turkey change course, when the present one is so deliberate?

“Israel is isolating itself.” No, Israel has bent over backwards to have good relations — with the Palestinians, with Egypt, with Turkey. Any isolation is being imposed by those who — pay attention, here it comes — do not want a solution to the conflict between Israel and its neighbors that leaves a Jewish state in existence. Can anything be more obvious?

Do Mahmoud Abbas and Fatah want coexistence? Of course not, the evidence is overwhelming that their goal is to destroy Israel. Does Hamas want coexistence? Don’t make me laugh. Does the Turkish Islamist AKP regime want good relations? Of course not, the more they hurt Israel, the better a candidate for leadership of the Muslim Middle East they will be. Do the Egyptian Islamists and nationalists want good relations? Of course not — they, too, want to prove that they are qualified to lead the Muslim world, and they need someone to blame for the economic catastrophe that is already brewing.

The Europeans (although there are exceptions) play along. They have trade relations with Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, etc. — whose regimes, incidentally, are at each others throats about every imaginable issue other than the need to end the Jewish state. And the Europeans have good, solid Israel-hating — Jew-hating, too, if the truth be told — constituencies at home, and it is not all due to Muslim immigrants, either.

So what about the Obama Administration? What does it get for joining in with the scapegoating of Israel, along with the rest of the schoolyard bullies? Somebody should ask them, because I am giving up on looking for economic and geopolitical explanations.

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Fatwa: “Every Israeli who enters Egypt – tourist or not – should be killed” (video)

Posted on  by creeping
CREEPING SHARIA
Vlad Tepes has this video, Muslim Brotherhood Leader: “Every Israeli who enters Egypt–tourist or not–should be killed”.

He also notes that the Muslim in the video is the founder of the American Islamic College discussed in the last post (9/11 A Wonderful Opportunity).
Eeyore recommended reading the comments, where we found this from Golem:
Salah Sultan is a member of the Fiqh Council of North America, the judicial body of Obama’s favorite Muslim outreach group, the Islamic Society of North America. He is also the former director of tarbiyah for the Muslim American Society and the founder of their Islamic American University. They are all front groups for the Muslim Brotherhood here in America. MAS was the group that paid for Congressman Keith Ellison’s hajj trip last year. They are also heavily involved in college campus activity in both Canada and the states
Discover the Networks confirms most of that:
Salah Sultan is the president of the Islamic American University, and was the head of the Muslim American Society’s Department of Islamic Research and Studies. During the 1999 annual conference of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a group which terrorism expert Steven Emerson has characterized as Hamas’ “primary voice in the United States,” Sultan encouraged young people to strive toward martyrdom. “I want every child,” he said, “to sleep on the wound of Palestine and the actions of martyrdom, just like that mother in the country whose son wrote to her that they are to meet in Paradise.”
How many other Muslims in the U.S. feel the same way?
NOTE:
After reading about Egypt's RANSOM for a USA college student this morning, this video might as well include the entire West!  Americans - be forewarned - "tourists or not" - stay out of Egypt!  It cost us 1.5 MILLION to get 3 Americans released from Iran last week; today, a sum is not mentioned for the release of our Amiercan citizen, but you can bet it is a "King's" ransom!

Arab Woman at Festival Admist Jordan is Palestine ... by Tundra Tabloids


ARAB WOMAN AT FESTIVAL ADMITS JORDAN IS PALESTINE, SAYS WOULD REMURDER ANWAR SADAT IF SHE COULD……..

She makes a lot of stunning admissions. The more they open up their yaps, the more they expose themselves for who they really are. KGS
Via our friend Sheik Yer’mami:
“Our friends over at United West provide some revealing information on how Jordanian’s or as they like to be called Palestinians truly think. When Walid was young and living in the “West Bank” he saluted the Jordanian Flag and prayed for King Hussein of Jordan. Walid’s father held a Jordanian passport. So this Palestinian woman who lives in Dearborn confirms the truth.”

How do you know when Joe Biden is lying?

ISRAEL MATZAV
BY Carl in Jerusalem
October 2, 2011
How do you know when Joe Biden is lying? His mouth is open. Watch this interview from 2007 in which the man who said that Pollard should be released 'over my dead body' says he should be 'given leniency' but not pardoned (I would assume in that case that 'leniency' means released - what else could it mean?).

Let's go to the videotape (Hat Tip: YNet)
And this guy is our 'best friend' in the Obama administration? Does anyone wonder why no one in Israel trusts the Obama administration?


Note:
See Israeli Frontline for more information: "Report: Obama Wanted to Release Jonathan Pollard but Biden Refused"

Egypt: "Send us the Money"

Note: The ink isn't dry from the recent agreement and ransoms paid for 3 American "spies" released in Iran and this morning, we wake up to the fact that yet another Islamic country is willing to release a young college student in exchange for "greater US political and financial support". Surprise, surprise! I can't help but wonder if this is another form of terrorism by predominately Muslim nations; it sure is fast becoming a lucrative business!  If, as Egypt states, this was all a mistake and Grapel is not a spy, why is the US paying a ransom for his release?  Why not just release him, Egypt?!  And why isn't the US simply informing all nations who kidnap our tourists, hikers, and idiot college-age students that all aid will immediately be cut off unless these countries STOP this form of terrorism?  Here's an idea: Have the US State Department ban American tourists from visiting Islamic nations that have held our  citizens for a "King's ransom" - so much for "political support"! (See YNet's news, below)


Egyptian official reportedly admits 'Grapel no spy'

Al-Hayat quotes senior Egyptian official as saying US defense secretary will take Ilan Grapel back home later this week 'in exchange for financial benefits'
Roee Nahmias
Published: 10.02.11, 09:11 / Israel News

A senior Egyptian official has admitted that Ilan Grapel was not a spy, London-based newspaper al-Hayat reported Sunday. The dual US-Israel national is expected to be released from prison after four months this week, it was further reported.


On Saturday, Egypt said it was considering releasing Grapel, who has been incarcerated in the country since June 12. Grapel was charged by local authorities with spying for Israel. His parents visited him on Saturday along with US consul general to Egypt, Roberto Powers.

Related stories:

According to a report by MENA news agency, Cairo authorities are considering releasing the 27-year-old in exchange for "greater US political and financial support."


Grapel in Egypt. Suffers from chronic disease
Grapel in Egypt. Suffers from chronic disease


MENA also reported that Grapel suffers from a genetic chronic disease, and his mother, who also suffers from the condition, confirmed the report.

The senior Egyptian official told al-Hayat that US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is scheduled to arrive in Egypt on Tuesday and will "take Grapel back with him at the end of the visit."

The source noted that "what Grapel did during the revolution did not amount to spying and by this logic he can be released in exchange for financial benefits."

Grapel immigrated to Israel from the US and served as a lone soldier in the Paratroopers' 101 Battalion. He enlisted in the IDF in March 2005 and was injured during the Second Lebanon War.

He had been traveling in Egypt during the popular revolution and was reportedly intrigued by the ongoings. Arab media reports suggested he tried to spark a civil war between Egypt's Muslims and Coptic Christians.






Did Killing Awlaki Cross a Constitutional Line?


THE NATIONAL PATRIOT

By Craig Andresen on October 1, 2011 at 10:12 am

In light of the killing of Awlaki in Yemen yesterday, an American citizen, there are some who are pointing to the Constitution’s 5th Amendment and crying foul. Certainly this must be considered and to do so, we must first look AT that amendment.
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived  of life, liberty, or property, without due  process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
Okay.
Was Awlaki relieved of private property, taken for public use, without just compensation?
No.

Was Awlaki subject for the same offense twice put in jeopardy of life or limb?
No.

Was Awlaki held to answer for a capitol, or otherwise infamous crime?
Yes.

Was Awlaki presented an indictment of a grand jury?
No.

Was Awlaki’s “case” arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in the time of war or public danger?
Ahhhhh…That’s the rub.
Awlaki was indeed an American citizen. Nobody is arguing that. He was born in New Mexico and lived most of his life in these United States.

While he was NOT in the service of OUR country, or arguably any OTHER country at the time of his terrorist conduct, he WAS without question engaging in actions of war AGAINST our nation and our, his…fellow citizens.

What we really have here is a question of conduct and not just in the sense of right or wrong.
Were his activities, as a terrorist, perpetrated against the United States, a law enforcement issue or were they a military issue?
I would suggest his actions were carried out under al Qaeda’s declaration of war against the United States – and as Awlaki was acting on behalf OF al Qaeda, the issue was that of a military nature rather than of a law enforcement nature.

Does our military have the authority to kill the enemy in war? Of course they do. If they did not have that authority,  then what is our military for to begin with?
The Military operated, in the case of Awlaki, acted within their scope when they fired Hellfire missiles on the car in which he was riding.

Clearly, the 5th amendment is not the only part of the Constitution which must be consulted in the demise of Awlaki.

It is Section 3 of the constitution which deals with treason.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”
“The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”
Okay, let’s take that last part first. What exactly does that mean?
In a nutshell, it means that Congress can declare the punishment for treason but no punishment can be handed down to relatives of the person guilty of the offense.
As for the first part…
Did Awlaki levy war against the United States?
Yes.

Did Awlaki adhere to our enemies?
Yes.

Was there testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act?
Arguably yes. Many officials were plenty aware of Awlaki’s contact with 3 of the 9-11 hijackers and clearly, through email records and other statements, more than two people were plenty aware of his direct contact with the underwear bomber, the Time’s Square bomber (an attack which failed) and with the Fort Hood Shooter.

So, was Awlaki guilty of treason?
This is a grey area as there was never a trial and Awlaki was never found formally guilty in court but it would be perhaps the greatest stretch of reality to claim that because he never appeared in court he was not guilty of treason…and traditionally, the penalty for treason is death.

Let’s now place all of this into a different context.

Had we seen, during WWII, Hitler riding in a car, would we not have been within our authority, during a time of war, to kill him? Of course we would. The obvious difference is that Hitler was not a U.S. citizen. Okay. If a U.S. citizen, on the battlefield started killing our own troops, would our military not have been within their authority to kill that person? Again the answer is, of course we would.

Awlaki was a citizen of the U.S. and was acting in consort with our enemies and as the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, he held a position of power in the waging of war against America and our allies. While he never appeared in court to face charges of treason he was clearly guilty of it and our military in concert with the CIA took him out.

Does this mean that the President has the authority to do the same thing, let’s say, to an identified U.S. citizen, identified as a terrorist, who is riding down the road on a U.S. highway?

The glaring difference would have to be that in THIS country, we have many more options available. While I do not believe it to be a law enforcement issue but a military one, even so, various elements of law enforcement, local, state and or federal, here, could be employed to capture, or if need be, kill said terrorist.

In a road in Yemen, we simply do not have those options available and when one considers the difficulty of even finding the wanted individual, time is of the essence. Once identified, the options are scant and action must be taken. That is precisely what happened.

Yemeni officials discovered his place of hiding, surveillance was issued, the target was on the move and rather than risk losing Awlaki, he was eliminated.

Finally, is it right to question such a move and the constitutionality of it?
Of course it is and, while I am not a constitutional attorney, I have a hard time discerning the outcome of a constitutional challenge on this issue. Clearly there seem to be some grey areas and the Constitution must be strictly adhered to at all times. Just as clearly,  Awlaki was at war with the U.S. and therefore treasonous.
Is a constitutional amendment in order?

I don’t believe so but a clear definition of rules of engagement is. There are plenty of precedents for this action not the least of which would be our own civil war. Were not those killed in that war U.S citizens engaged in war against the union?
Yes.
Did George Washington violate the Constitution in quelling the Whiskey Rebellion?
No.

If this action goes to the U.S. Supreme Court and is found to be constitutional, and I believe it would be found as such, there will be those who will continue to claim otherwise but in doing so, they would be placing our nation and our lives at risk by making the prosecution of war a court case.

What SHOULD have been done. some time ago, or at the very least by Obama before issuing the kill or capture order, was to rescind Awlaki’s citizenship at which point, the issue now at hand would be non existent.

Awlaki, upon deciding to become a part of al Qaeda, also made the decision to become the enemy in war and in war, we do not send lawyers, we send the military. We, in war, do not sent subpoenas, we send hellfire missiles. In war we do not read the enemy their rights, we read them their last rites.
Awlaki was the enemy.

Awlaki was sent hellfire missiles.

May he rest in pieces.

Obama legitimates assassination.


ISRAPUNDIT

October 1, 2011
By Ted Belman

The killing of Anwar al-Awlaki Friday is result of military operation by U.S. forces. And he was an American citizen. In fact with the greater availability of drones these assassination have increased four fold. What is interesting is that liberals, Obama included, didn’t like administrative detention and instead turned to assassination to avoid detention. Ironic, no?

Remember that Israel’s policy of assassination always drew pious condemnation from the world. Still does. And Israel is still not permitted to assassinate Hamas leaders.

Also the liberal High Court in Israel has gone so far as to hold soldiers accountable for killing terrorists rather than arresting them.

What an upside down world.

Posted by Ted Belman @ 6:13 am
Comments posted on Israpundit:
  1. Also the liberal High Court in Israel has gone so far as to hold soldiers accountable for killing terrorists rather than arresting them.
    It makes me wonder whose side they are on.
    Enemy soldiers have the right under international law to surrender and become prisoners of war (in which case they cannot be put in jails but must be held in prisoner camps that meet international standards–it’s illegal to lock a POW in a prison cell!). Terrorists are not soldiers and, as far as I (and most military commanders prior to 1946) were concerned, have no rights whatsoever. Russia seems to agree noting how it applied the equivalent of Rule 303 to some Somali pirates a while ago and quite likely to the Beslan terrorists.
    The fact that terrorists like Samir Kuntar get revolving door justice, in which they do not complete a fraction of their prison sentences because of political deals, is another strong argument for Rule 303. The latter need not be applied overtly–if the terrorist is holding a weapon, the IDF can simply not bother to ask him to drop it before it blows him into very small pieces. Asking for an enemy’s surrender is an optional courtesy that a decent person offers enemy soldiers who are in a hopeless situation; it need not be offered to terrorists.
    Anwar al-Awlaki meanwhile always had the option to surrender to U.S. authorities, be read his rights, and be processed through our judicial system. He was a criminal who was wanted dead or alive (but in custody). He chose to take his chances so as to remain at large and commit more crimes so he ended up dead. To hell with him and his friend Osama bin Laden.
  2. warmonger says:
    The world to Israel: You are NOT ALLOWED to use the same tactics as the rest us. Dont ask for an explanation just do as your told OR we WILL react! We must stay the course and in our minds thumb our nose at these idiots!! We WILL get the last laugh! It will be DELICIOUS! I haven't eaten an Arab for breakfast in a long time and I am GETTING HUNGRY!!
    My note:
    Ten years after 9/11 and Americans, including one candidate running in the upcoming presidential elections, screams in outrage over the U.S. using the technology of a Drone to seek out and kill a known terrorist in Yemen.  Drones save lives of U.S. soldiers, while keeping America safer - so, it's time to update the Rules of War, since these Islamic terrorist do not go by the book and are well adapt at blowing us up!  Anyone with sympathies towards terrorists attacking U.S. citizens SHOULD NOT be a candidate for taking out the trash, never mind "President of the U.S.".
    And yes, Israel is constantly condemned, blamed and ridiculed for protecting its citizens from the constant attacks of known terrorists, so same goes for Israel; again, update the Rules of War against terrorism - and STOP allowing other nations to dictate how you should protect your citizens 
    Terrorists have no rules and are cowards! FIRE UP THOSE MISSILES!!


Al Qaeda infighting led to Awkali killing in Yemen. Ayman Zuwahiri is in Yemen


Al Qaeda leader Ayman Zuwahiri.
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 30, 2011, 10:23 PM (GMT+02:00)
 
Anwar Al Awlaki
The tip-off which enabled two American drone-borne Hellfire missiles to kill the US-born Anwar al-Awkali by locating his convoy in the Khashef in the Jawf province of Yemen, 140 kilometers east of the capital Sanaa, reached US intelligence as a result of a power struggle within Al Qaeda's leadership in Yemen.

Killed too was a second US-born al Qaeda operative.
DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources disclose that the internal strife which led to their deaths was sharpened by the recent arrival in Yemen of the new Al Qaeda leader Ayman Zuwahiri.

Exactly when he arrived and by what route is not known. Zuwahiri is thought to have come to check out Yemen as his next permanent base in view of his plans for transposing al Qaeda's center of operations from the Pakistani-Afghan arena to the Middle East, North Africa and the Sahara.

In North Africa, the Al Qaeda leader has learned that the Muslim extremists fighting in Libya's National Transitional Council ranks against Muammar Qaddafi have cemented their control not just of Tripoli, the capital, but also of Tobruk near the Egyptian border. DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report that those Islamists, while pretending to defer to the NTC, in fact deny its officials access to the key Libyan cities under their fists.  This is the first time that military forces linked to Al Qaeda have attained control of major Mediterranean ports and the use of a military airfield.

In Yemen, the situation is not very different from Libya. Al Qaeda has seized large parts of Abyan Province in the south and is fighting in sections of the Red Sea port of Aden.

Tuesday, Sept. 27, an Al Qaeda suicide bomber managed to maneuver a car loaded with explosives right up to the convoy of Yemeni defense minister Mohamed Nasser Ali. The minister survived the blast but several of his bodyguards did not.

If Yemen's central government in Sanaa continues to disintegrate, there will be nothing to stop Al Qaeda from grabbing all of Aden Port as well as Abyan and Hadramauth. Even without control of the big port city, the jihadis are within easy reach of anchorages along the Gulf of Aden coast with free access to the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf.

Intelligence experts suspect Zuwahiri may have been spirited into Yemen through one of those anchorages from a boat which brought him from Pakistan.  He arrived with big plans and new ambitions: One is to expand Al Qaeda's control of South Yemen in conformity with his quest for new strongholds with access to the sea. Its bastions in Afghanistan and Pakistani Waziristan were landlocked and without an airfield.

But over and above this strategic push, neither Zuwahiri nor Osama Bin Laden, who was killed by US commandos in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2, ever completely trusted Anwar al Awkali.

Although US President Barack Obama lauded the death of "the leader of external operations" of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, AQAP,  Bin Laden and his successor never let him have this title – or even command of the Yemen sector  - despite his pleas. Neither was ready to countenance an American whom they didn't entirely trust in a position of high command in their organization

Awkali made his name in the West as a skilled and powerful spokesman for al Qaeda's cause. He never distinguished himself as an operational commander.  Therefore, our counter-terror experts have always been wary of attributing to him personally the failed attempt to blow up a US airliner on Christmas 2009 and the planting of a bomb aboard a cargo plane in October 2010. 

He was certainly linked to the Palestinian US Major Nidal Malik Hassan's murder of 13 US military and security personnel at Ford Hood in November 2009, although more likely by inspiration than specific directives.

The second American who died in the US drone-borne missile strike Friday was Samir Khan, editor of Al Qaeda's English-language Inspire Magazine.

From the point of view of the West, Al Qaeda has lost two senior operatives.  But to hardline Zuwahiri, Al Qaeda in Yemen has been purged of its American module. Therefore, while the US justly celebrates a major victory in its war on the Islamist terrorist organization, its new leader most probably decided to sacrifice his two American assets for the sake of tightening the ranks of AQAP and drawing a denser curtain of secrecy than ever before over his next steps.    

Saturday, October 1, 2011

AS THE WORLD TURNS ... "US PRODS JORDAN TO HOST HAMAS-DAMASCUS"


To isolate Abbas, US prods Jordan to host Hamas-Damascus 


DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 30, 2011, 12:10 PM (GMT+02:00)


Khaled Meshaal in Jordan: Aug. 2009
Washington has played a strong card against Mahmoud Abbas' push for UN acceptance of a Palestinian state and his playing hard to get for resumed peace talks. After some arm-twisting, Jordan's King Abdullah agreed to let his main rival, the radical Hamas political leader, Khaled Meshaal, visit Amman. The Hamas leader arrived Wednesday, Sept. 29, for the second time since he and the entire Hamas leadership were expelled from the kingdom 12 years ago. He last visited Jordan in 2009 to attend his father's funeral.

Jordanian Interior Minister Mazen Saket made it clear that the special entry permit covered only a limited stay. Some Jordanian sources explained it was granted on the grounds of his ailing mother's admission to hospital.

However, DEBKAfile's Washington and intelligence sources report that the Hamas leader came to Amman for bigger fish: negotiations in the hope of permission to transfer the organization's political headquarters and staff from Damascus to Amman.

The Jordanian King is flatly opposed to this step – especially now - given the Palestinian terrorist leader's past history with the kingdom. He faces heavy US pressure, backed by Saudi Arabia, to relent. So far, he only agreed very reluctantly to Meshaal paying a short visit.

The Obama administration began pushing hard for the move when in the first half of September, the military rulers of Egypt decided to shut the door against Meshaal and his staff's relocation in Cairo. At first, they were amenable, hoping to use the transfer to get at Syrian President Bashar Assad and weaken Iran's westward drive into the Arab world. In the second half of August, they invited Meshaal to Cairo to discuss the transfer.

But in early September they changed their minds for three reasons:
1. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt's earlier flirtation with Iran had gone sour and the generals decided it was not a good time to introduce a pro-Iranian Palestinian entity into Cairo's unstable political scene.
2.  Hamas-Gaza had become a major thorn in their sides. Its armed militias and terrorists had poured out of the Gaza Strip to seize parts of northern Sinai and were taking delivery of burgeoning consignments of Libyan arms through Egypt and the peninsula. The last thing Egypt needed, they reckoned, was for Hamas to gain a second organized logistic headquarters in Cairo.
3.  Like other Middle East rulers, the Supreme Military Council of Egypt recognizes that Assad is on the point of finally crushing the popular uprising against his rule. They are therefore wary of unnecessarily antagonizing him. Accepting the Hamas political bureau in Cairo would be seen as a vote of no-confidence in the Syrian ruler's chances of survival.
Washington's decision to arrange for the Hamas politburo to move to Amman was motivated most of all by the wish to put Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in his place by having Hamas breathe down his neck not just from the Gaza Strip but also from Amman, where he maintains a large residence.

Washington was guided by four further considerations:
-  Khaled Meshaal's exit from Damascus would divest Assad of a key regional power lever as well as excluding him from a role on the Palestinian issue;

-  His relocation in Amman would, it is hoped, eventually weaken Hamas' ties with Tehran and the Lebanese Hizballah;

-  Washington decided to help Hamas to move house in its capacity as a branch of the transnational Muslim Brotherhood headquartered in Egypt, a movement whose interests the Obama administration opted to promote in the Arab Spring. At the same time, by refraining from pushing Assad out, the Obama administration paradoxically aided in the failure of the Syrian uprising and its Muslim Brotherhood spearhead.

-   The US administration sought to discipline the Palestinian leader for going through with his application for UN membership in defiance of President Barack Obama's strong objections.
Abbas, his Palestinian Authority and the PLO have always treated Jordan and its capital Amman as their logistical hinterland and sanctuary. Abbas spends at least as much time in his Amman mansion as he does in Ramallah. Placing Hamas' political leader cheek to jowl with him in his second home would pose a potential challenge to Abbas' position as the sole internationally-acceptable spokesman for the Palestinian cause.

If after moving to Jordan, Hamas should one day moderate its extremist agenda, which calls for Israel's annihilation and refuses to relinquish terror, Washington and Riyadh would acquire a second Palestinian option for negotiations outside Ramallah and the PLO establishment – or so it is believed in some US circles.

For more than a decade, the Hashemite king has kept Khaled Meshaal at arm's length and physically distant from his following among the violent elements of Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood leadership. His presence in Amman would strengthen those elements at a time when they are on the offensive.

But Abdullah found it hard to stand up to Saudi pressure which was accompanied by a guarantee that the oil kingdom's clandestine forces would stamp down on any Hamas subversion against the throne. He therefore relented – albeit only so far as letting Meshaal pay a short visit to the kingdom.

U.S Congress Freezes $200 Million Aid to Palestinians


oCTOBER 1, 2011
WRITTEN BY VIN
One third of US aid to Palestinians has been frozen since August, ‘The Independent’ reports; move apparently in response to UN bid.
The United States Congress reportedly blocked the transfer of $200 million in aid to the Palestinian Authority in what a Palestinian official called “collective punishment” for the PA’s bid for membership in the United Nations, UK daily The Independent reported on Saturday.
The unconfirmed report says that an unpublicized block on the transfer of funds, less than one third of the aid sent to the PA annually, has been in place since August.
The United States is opposed to the Palestinian bid to seek full UN membership and has vowed to veto such a move in the Security Council.
PA spokesman Ghassan Khatib told The Independent that cutting aid to the PA is “unjustified. These are mainly humanitarian and development projects – it is another kind of collective punishment which is going to harm the needs of the public without making any positive contribution.”
In mid September, the US House Foreign Affairs Committee began debating cutting off US aid to the Palestinian Authority for breaking ranks with the American-brokered peace process. In her opening statement, Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), credited former President George H.W. Bush in 1989 with “stop[ping] dead in its tracks” attempts by former Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat to seek recognition from various UN agencies after statehood was declared a year before. Ros-Lehtinen called upon President Obama to do the same in 2011 “to stop Abu Mazen’s [PA President Abbas] dangerous unilateral scheme” by suspending funds to any UN agency “that granted membership or any upgraded status to the PA.”
In July, a key Congressional committee considered a foreign aid bill that threatened funding to the Palestinian Authority and Lebanon, and would codify in law the George W. Bush letter to Ariel Sharon.
The bill, drawn up by Ros-Lehtinen, would also end by 2014 the president’s ability to waive the law that requires him to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, as well as mandate that official American documents list Jerusalem as part of Israel. The State Department would also have to report on its diplomatic activities on behalf of Israel to end efforts at isolating it.
Furthermore, it conditions aid to the PA on its recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and ending all anti-Israel incitement in state-owned media, among other measures; while aid to Lebanon includes a stipulation that no member of Hezbollah serve in the government.