Posts Tagged ‘Gaza’

h1

That Surreal Gaza Reconstruction Conference

March 6, 2009

How do you account for this gift of nearly one billion dollars of your hard earned tax money to the terrorists in Gaza? Why are Pres. Obama and Sec’ty. Hillary Clinton playing up to these terrorists which will lead to the rebuilding of their arsenal of rockets? Don’t you, as a loyal member of the party in power, have any voice in the direction your leader is taking you and this country? Will you stand idly by and watch your dollars being contributed to the killers of men, women and children who reside both in Gaza and Israel? Why the silence among you? Why not get out your marching clothes, picket signs and banners that accompanied you on your demostrations against the war in Iraq and begin taking over our streets and colleges to proclaim a quick end to our newly born  support for Muslim terror?

——————————————————————————————————————————————————–

That Surreal Gaza Reconstruction Conference

by Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com
March 3, 2009

Was I the only one rubbing my eyes in disbelief yesterday, as the Egyptian government hosted an “International Conference for the Reconstruction of Gaza”?

Husni Mubarak of Egypt addresses the Gaza donors’ conference.

It took place in Sharm El-Sheikh, attended by delegations from 71 states, plus 16 regional, international, and financial organizations. Its stated goal was to raise US$2.8 billion, of which $1.3 was for rebuilding what had been destroyed in the course of Israel’s recent war on Hamas (the rest would be sent to the Palestinian Authority to help improve its standing). The actual amount raised at the conference was $4.5 billion which, when added to previously committed funds, means the grant total for Gaza and the PA comes to $5.2 billion, to be disbursed over a two-year period. A delighted Egyptian foreign minister called the amount “beyond our expectations.” U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called it “a very productive conference”

Among the larger donations included a Gulf Cooperation Council contribution of $1.65 billion over five years and a U.S. government pledge of $900 million from the American taxpayer (of which $300 million will go for Gaza rebuilding).

Husni Mubarak of Egypt, Nicholas Sarkozy of France, Silvio Berlusconi of Italy, Ban Ki-moon of the United Nations, Amr Moussa of the Arab League, and Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority gave speeches.

Why my disbelief at this spectacle: I wonder if those eminentoes and worthies really believe that warfare in Gaza is a thing of the past, and that the time for reconstruction is nigh?

They must not read dispatches from southern Israel, which report the daily warfare that continues there. Take a representative news item from Yedi’ot Aharonot, dated February 28, “Experts: Grads in Ashkelon were advanced.”

the two Grad rockets that landed in Ashkelon Saturday morning[, Feb. 28,] were new and improved models, capable of greater destruction than those usually fired from Gaza. One of the rockets hit a school in the southern city, and succeeded in penetrating the fortification used to protect it from projectiles. … The Grad rockets that hit Ashkelon were two of only five or six locally manufactured 170 mm rockets ever fired at Israel, experts say. The rarely used rockets have a range of 14 km (8.6 miles) and are capable of massive damage, evident from the destruction witnesses described on the scene of Saturday’s attack.

In an official protest to the United Nations, the Israel’s Ambassador Gabriela Shalev noted that “there have been nearly 100 rocket and mortar attacks from the Gaza Strip” since the ceasefire on January 18, or over two per day. These have been increasing in number, with 12 rockets were fired at Sderot on March 1 alone.

Responding to these attacks, the Israeli cabinet resolved on March 1 that “should the firing from the Gaza Strip continue, it would be met by a painful, sharp, strong and uncompromising response by the security forces.” Prime Minister-designate Binyamin Netanyahu echoed this bellicosity, reportedly telling a European leader that he would not sacrifice Israel’s security “for a smile.”

(Saudi foreign minister Saud Al-Faisal, in unexpected agreement, noted that rebuilding Gaza would be “difficult and fool-hardy, so long as peace and security do not prevail” there.)

What the hell are the donor countries doing, getting in the middle of an on-going war with their high-profile supposed reconstruction effort? My best guess: this permits them subtly to signal Jerusalem that it better not attack Gaza again, because doing so will confront it with a lot of very angry donor governments – including, of course, the Obama administration.

Adding to the surreal quality is a blithe disregard for Israel’s security needs. Consider the attitude of Douglas Alexander, international development secretary for Britain’s Labour government, who pledged £30 million of his taxpayers’ funds to rebuild houses, schools, and hospitals in Gaza. “There is a desperate need for tough restrictions on the supply of goods to be relaxed,” he said, demanding next that “Israel must do the right thing and allow much-needed goods to get through to those men, women and children who continue to suffer.”

That’s very humanitarian of Mr. Alexander, but he willfully ignored Israeli expectations that Hamas will confiscate steel, concrete, and other imported construction materials to build more tunnels, bunkers, and rockets. After all, Hamas appropriated prior deliveries intended for civilians, and so blatantly that even the usually docile United Nations Relief and Works Agency protested.

Husni Mubarak might warn Hamas not to treat the donors’ pledges as a “conquest of war,” but it will assuredly do precisely that. U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (Republican of Illinois) got it right: “To route $900 million to this area, and let’s say Hamas was only able to steal 10 percent of that, we would still become Hamas’ second-largest funder after Iran.”

So, under the cheery banner of building, in Clinton’s words, “a comprehensive peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors,” donor states are not only defying Israel to protect itself from rocket fire but they are funneling matériel to Hamas.

Is this ignorance or mendacity? I suspect the latter; no one is that dumb.

h1

Why Israel Did Not Lose in Gaza

February 13, 2009

AN EXCELLENT REPORT ON THE RECENT WAR IN GAZA.

THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: WHY DID WE PULL OUT WHEN WE DID?

DON

Conventional versus Non-Conventional Warfare and Why Israel Did Not Lose in Gaza

Posted By Phyllis Chesler On February 10, 2009 @ 10:49 am In Uncategorized | 14 Comments

My good friend, Herb Berger, of lucky, sunny, southern California, just sent me a Report issued by SFC Ariel (Orion) Siegelman upon his return from combat operations in Gaza. Siegelman founded the Draco Group as a service in advanced security and training. He served in the Israel Defense Force, Special Forces, as a counter terror operative, counter terror sniper and counter terror instructor. He remains active in the Reserves where he serves on active duty when necessary, as well as an instructor for rapid response teams, counter terror, urban sniper situations, and special warfare tactics.

I do not know whether Siegelman has published his Report anywhere but even if he has, it really deserves a continuously wide reading.

For years now, Israeli and American military tacticians have had to learn how to define “triumph” when a conventional army is facing a non-conventional army in which seasoned soldiers may disguise themselves as civilians, conduct “hit and run” operations and then disappear, and when conventional soldiers want to live but non-conventional soldiers are perfectly willing to die as long as they can also kill you.

One of the many things I learned when I lived in Afghanistan so long ago was that for some people, fighting, killing, looting, kidnapping-for-ransom (or pleasure), and dying was a veritable way of life, that fighting and dying gave their lives significance and was the only way they could fulfill their obligations as the male members of a tribe and clan. My American and western concept of steady, inevitable progress, my womanly concept of mediating differences in a non-violent way had absolutely no place in this wild and gorgeous place. Even I was charmed by the rifle-bearing and friendly (to me) Khyber Pass male relatives who visited me in Kabul. They had come to meet their “first American woman.”

Indeed, the other night I watched the film “Mongol” which imagines the early life of Genghis Khan. It is a bloody, but beautiful and brilliant film. Watch it. It will help you understand the psychology of the permanent barbarian-fighter, who is born and bred to battle as a way of life.

In terms of neo-barbarian modern warfare, (airplane hijackings, suicide bombings, torture and mutilation of captives, permanent low-level warfare, vicious propaganda), Israel has been tested early on and has had to learn how to best defend itself. World-wide, Israeli embassies and consulates have, unfortunately, been forced to lead the way in terms of modern security measures. Israel’s El Al airlines are one of the safest airlines to fly. Now, we are all Israelis in terms of airport security and other public building security measures.

Which leads us to Ariel (Orion) Siegelman’s really smart analysis of how to understand the recent and ongoing war in Gaza. Here is his full Report.
________________________________________
divider

“I returned home from war in Gaza last week and people keep asking me the same question:

“Why did the Israelis pull out before they finished the job?”

The premise of this question is that the Israelis should have continued the war in the Gaza Strip until it was conquered and Hamas was toppled. This is an erroneous premise that is dangerous in the new kind of war and is based on an outdated western understanding of warfare which has no basis in the new war theater. The problem with the above premise is that it is based in the understanding that there are front lines and there are real lines on the battlefield. This faulty rule states that if you can push through enemy territory and fight until you get to the enemy’s opposite borders, you have conquered the land and the war is over. This premise would state that, in the case of Israel, when you capture the Hamas headquarters and arrest or kill the leaders, Hamas has been toppled. This is the same lack of understanding that led to many problems that US forces face today in Iraq. People still cannot understand why the war is raging on, even after we captured the enemy’s leader, Sadam Hussein (see Draco Report, March 2008). Sorry folks, the age of conquest is dead.

The conventional war, where soldiers meet on the battlefield to fight, is a thing of the past. Today technology is so great that any target that is identifiable, can be destroyed by a conventional army with pinpoint accuracy within a matter of seconds. Even if 2 great powers were to meet on a battlefield, there would be such tremendous devastation on both sides within the first few minutes that it would make this conventional battle pointless. This is all the more true for a force that cannot hope to match his enemy’s technological capabilities (e.g. Hamas, Al Qaeda, Tamil Tigers, etc). In this case he must equal the playing field by rendering the technology useless. The neutralization of technology is accomplished through unconventional tactics. And we have seen many cases of inferior numbers with inferior weaponry beating back a seemingly stronger enemy when the enemy was stuck in his conventional and rigid mindset, unwilling to meet the unconventional force with flexibility and creativity.

In the case of Israel vs. Hamas, Israel has a conventional army and Hamas is an unconventional force. When throwing around these terms it is very important to understand that conventional and unconventional forces define victory in VERY different ways. If the conventional army does not win, it loses. If the unconventional army does not lose, it wins. Therefore, the unconventional force is always in an advantage. We are not playing a numbers game here. We are talking about the reality on the new battlefield. Perception, my friends; that is all that matters.

A conventional army operates by
1. Identifying the enemy.
2. Pinning the enemy down.
3. Killing or capturing the enemy.

Any unconventional force recognizes these three rules and organizes its operability to combat them. The three rules of unconventional warfare are:
1. Make it impossible for the opposing force to identify you.
2. Never stand and fight.
3. Don’t worry about numbers. Just wear them down.

The unconventional force does not need to, and should never meet 100 soldiers on the battlefield with an equal opposing force (the whole concept of unconventional warfare is unequal force). He looks at 100 opposing enemy as 100 targets. He only needs to field 2 fighters who pop up out of a hole in the ground or from behind a wall, spray 50 rounds of ammunition and then run away. Each 10 second attack should kill or wound a few of the conventional force Add booby traps to this kind of mixture and the unconventional fighter can greatly increase his impact on those soldiers. In this manner, 2 men can bring hundreds of enemy soldiers to a cowering stand-still. The conventional soldiers never know where the attack will come from. By the time they identify the source of fire, the enemy has vanished. Most importantly, the conventional force becomes afraid and demoralized and over time, the home front withdraws their support for what seems endless and pointless, and pressures the government to pull the forces out, making the continuation of operations eventually impossible. When the conventional force finally pulls out, the unconventional force will ALWAYS declare victory, showing gory pictures and telling the stories of their heroic plight against a superior force that they drove out under fire

Now let us talk about Gaza.

I have never seen a more perfectly carried out operation of a conventional army against an unconventional force. It is important to recognize that the Israeli intelligence arm proved, once again, to be stellar in providing fresh and mind-boggling, detailed assessments of the enemy, his capabilities, and his positions. All rules of engagement and mission plans were developed directly from this information.

So why did we pull out when we did?

Imagine going into a casino and having inside information. You KNOW that you are going to make money, so you lay down all of your chips and you win big. The trick is to get out before the casino starts to figure you out and win it back. Gaza is a very dangerous place. It is full of booby traps, tunnels, bunkers, and a very violent enemy. Every moment that our guys are inside of a place like that, there is a tremendous potential for carnage. And due to the fact that the enemy is unconventional in nature, all Hamas needs is ONE devastating strike on an Israeli position, for one IED (improvised explosive device) to take out a team, or for one tank to be blown up, and they have acquired victory. We knew from the start of an operation like this that we were eventually going to pull out and they only needed ONE story that they could tell after we were gone. It was undoubtedly the grace of G-d that stole the smallest bit of victory from Hamas. I personally have met this enemy many times over the last few years and the fact they came out of this situation appearing incapable to the world, like a rag-tag bunch of fools, borders on miraculous. They are a VERY serious, well supplied, highly trained army and we expected high numbers of casualties. The decision to pull out when we did was partially due to this fact – get out while you are ahead.

Before entering the Gaza Strip, the army was very clear about our objectives. We were told that we do not want to destroy all of their capabilities and we are not trying to topple Hamas. This is hard for many good people to swallow but it is the best thing under the circumstances. Our goal was simply to drastically reduce their capabilities to hit us and to remind our enemies, and ourselves (after Lebanon) that we are not wimps. The fact that upwards of 100 rockets per day were falling in Israel proper before this operation and now, a handful of rockets hit every week, shows that we, in fact, accomplished our goals. I am well aware that it is still intolerable to allow someone to shoot missiles at you and it seems ridiculous to say that we achieved our goals because they “ONLY shoot a few rockets at us.” However, in this situation, it is VERY important to do a cost-benefit analysis. In this sort of conflict within 2 weeks you can destroy between 80% and 90% of the enemy’s capabilities. However, in order to get rid of the last 10%, it might take 2 years or more of much harder, more surgical effort. Remember what we said above, EVERY MOMENT that you are inside, you are in GREAT danger of losing men. The costs are simply not worth that last 10%.

The idea of toppling Hamas is not on the menu for 2 simple reasons:

1. Hamas is an idea. You cannot kill an idea with military action. It is foolish to think that you can topple a movement through conquest. As long as 2 individuals can hide and claim that they hold true to the Hamas ideals, you have not accomplished your goal of “toppling Hamas”.

2. I’ll let you in on a little secret (any politician will deny this), but we don’t want to topple Hamas – and you shouldn’t either. You see, Fatah (the opposition to Hamas) is considered to be moderate because they don’t murder quite as many people and because Mahmud Abbas (”prime minister” of the Palestinian Authority and head of Fatah) wears a suit. If Hamas did not exist, only the “moderates” would be left and then the world, as well as the Israeli Left would apply great pressure to create a Palestinian State. And even if you think that a Palestinian State is a good idea then I think that you should move to Gaza for a while. Fatah is a terrorist organization! But the world won’t care about that if Hamas is out of the picture. Therefore, Hamas has its place, albeit weaker, but it has its place.

Ask yourself, what more would we have gained by staying in for an extra week or an extra month? It is true, we could have killed more of them and we could have destroyed more of their tunnels, buildings, and cashes. But at what cost to us? We left after inflicting great destruction to their capabilities and now, as they are pulling themselves out of the rubble, they are desperately trying to claim some sort of victory and even their own people roll their eyes at that attempt. They have no stories of heroism or victory that they can grasp onto in this new kind of war where perception is what builds you or tears you down. Therefore, they lost

So what about the future?

Without a doubt, Hamas is already re-arming and planning for the next chapter of this conflict. The enemy is highly motivated, cunning, adaptable, and vicious. So we must be the same. Even though some analysts would have us believe that radical Islam is on the decline, I assure you, we have not yet seen it peak. The United States talks of leaving Iraq in another year or two and you must ask yourself how long it will take for Iran to fill that void.”

h1

With Neighbors like this….

February 9, 2009

islam1

islam2

ISRAEL – GAZA – HAMAS

h1

War Without End

January 20, 2009

War Without End

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | 8 January 2009

Mideast: Proponents of a French-Egyptian plan for a cease-fire in Gaza say it might stop the fighting. But for any chance at peace, Hamas must be defeated decisively.


Read More: Middle East & North Africa | Global War On Terror


The idea behind French President Nicholas Sarkozy’s plan was to call an immediate cease-fire to permit humanitarian aid into Gaza — which Israel did — then to hold urgent talks to stop the violence. Israel, with reservations, agreed; Hamas, however, rejected the idea.

Don’t worry. Israel will get blamed.

Watching the world’s reaction as a small nation surrounded by enemies defends itself from attack is a sickening thing. Along with celebrity Israel-haters such as singer Annie Lennox and former model and rock-star wife Bianca Jagger, the far left in the U.S., a large swath of European intelligentsia and the United Nations have cast Israel as villain and Hamas as victim.

But they’ve got it backwards. Israel has taken extraordinary care to avoid civilian casualties, going so far as to warn those in buildings it is preparing to strike. Hamas has no such compunction. It uses civilians as human shields, hoping to raise the death toll so the so-called “international community” will blame Israel even more.

In talks, Israel has shown repeatedly through concessions as well as words that it wants a deal and will accept a Palestinian state.

But each time Israel has made concessions, it’s been met with the implacable fury of its foe. The world Islamist movement, as embodied by Hamas, seeks Israel’s annihilation and nothing else.

It happened after talks at Camp David in July 2000 with President Clinton, when Israel offered PLO chief Yasser Arafat literally 98% of the land he requested, and the possibility of getting most of the remaining 2% down the road. The response? Arafat stormed out, and the violent Second Intifada began.

In 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza, an act of good will and a major strategic concession to its enemies. But there was no reciprocity. Islamist terrorists attacked Israel, and in 2006 the Palestinians themselves voted Hamas into power — knowing full well that Hamas’ explicit goal is the destruction of the Jewish state.

More recently, Hamas spent a six-month cease-fire with Israel rearming and restocking its weapons. When that cease-fire ended on Dec. 19, 2008, Hamas began lobbing deadly Iranian-built Qassam and Russian-designed Grad rockets at Israeli civilian populations.

Fortunately for Israel, a network of bomb shelters built over 60 years of unyielding conflict has kept casualties to a minimum.

Sadly, the same can’t be said in Gaza. Hamas has used children’s schools, hospitals and mosques as staging grounds for attacks and to store munitions. When civilian human shields are inevitably harmed — and injuries to children and innocents are always regrettable — Hamas doesn’t get blamed. Israel does.

Those who think Israel should stop fighting miss the point: Hamas’ 1988 charter explicitly calls for the murder of Jews in the name of Islam and the destruction of Israel. It must be repudiated.

The Gaza war could end tomorrow, and the promise of a Palestinian state redeemed, if Hamas and its terrorist allies in the Mideast, including Iran, ended their war of extermination against Israel.

Sadly, this won’t happen. No country can negotiate away its very existence. If Israel doesn’t destroy Hamas, it will never have peace.

h1

Hamas Uses Schools and Ceasefire to Shoot Rockets at Israel

January 20, 2009

Hamas Uses Schools and Ceasefire to Shoot Rockets at Israel

h1

Paratroopers Operate in Gaza

January 16, 2009

Paratroopers Operate in Gaza, 16 Jan 2009, 10:26 IST

paratroop12

paratroop21Paratroopers prepare for confrontation with Hamas forces.

paratroop3Paratrooper Brigade commander, Hartzi Halevi, during an IDF operation in Gaza.

h1

IDF Confiscating Weapons, 15 Jan. 2009

January 15, 2009

Weapons Confiscated from the House of Terror Operative in Gaza, 15 Jan 2009, 18:20 IST

gazaweapons21

gazaweapons3

gazaweapons

h1

Israeli Navy Strikes Hamas-linked Terror Targets in Gaza 29 Dec. 2008

January 14, 2009

Israeli Navy Strikes Hamas-linked Terror Targets in Gaza 29 Dec. 2008

h1

Precision Airstikes on Hamas Terror Targets 7 Jan. 09

January 14, 2009

h1

Weapons in Gaza Mosque

January 14, 2009

h1

Israel’s Gaza Surge

January 13, 2009

Very simple – take out the source – trace the trajectory of every missile and return one to destroy the source – every one.  Remember? high-school math? Kepler? Newton? Calculus, Integral calculus?

This is critcially important!!! – Can America trust Obama?

Hamas must be destroyed – Israel must disarm them completely!

Don

——————————-

Israel’s Gaza Surge -

wsj 4 jan 09

Obama’s Iran diplomacy needs a Hamas defeat.

Israel’s ground incursion into Gaza raises the strategic stakes for the Jewish state, for its moderate Arab neighbors, and also for Barack Obama’s looming Presidency. Having committed to disarming Hamas, Israel can’t now afford to lose its second war in two years.

Though the analogy isn’t perfect, in some sense this Hamas exercise can be understood as Israel’s version of the U.S.-Iraqi “surge” in Iraq. The year 2006 was the worst in more than a generation for Western interests in the Middle East, with al Qaeda and Iran’s proxies advancing in Iraq, Hezbollah fighting Israel to a draw in Lebanon, and Hamas rising in Palestine. The 2007-2008 surge reclaimed the advantage in Iraq, and now Israel is attempting to do the same against Hamas.

The strategic question is larger than merely stopping Hamas missiles from landing in Israeli cities, though that is justification enough for Israel’s bombing and the ground operation. A nation like Israel, with enemies on all sides, must maintain an aura of invincibility if it is to have any chance at peaceful co-existence. It was that aura after two wars that induced Egypt to agree to peace with Israel in the 1970s. By contrast, the 2006 Lebanon campaign convinced radical Arabs and Persians that Israel had grown soft and could be beaten. Israel can’t let Hamas maintain a similar mythology at the end of this operation, or the costs will be far higher down the road.

Israeli leaders are talking as if they realize this strategic reality, though it’s hard to know for sure because their war aims remain publicly ill-defined. Haim Ramon, the Israeli vice premier, says the goal is nothing short of the elimination of Hamas rule in Gaza, though that hasn’t been repeated by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert or other senior war leaders. Defense Minister Ehud Barak has said the operation “won’t be easy or short,” though understandably without much elaboration given the need to keep Hamas in the dark.

We don’t agree with those who claim that Israel faces only two bad options: either a limited campaign that scores a tactical victory while allowing Hamas to survive as a military force; or a return to the full-scale occupation that Israel abandoned in 2005. Israel could re-occupy some parts of Gaza, this time without Israeli settlements to defend. More realistically, given Israel’s domestic reluctance for such a presence, it could fight long enough to eliminate Hamas as a military threat, then announce a policy that every rocket fired at Israel in the future would be met by a “proportionate” airstrike or other reprisal. This would allow Israel to claim military victory in the short term, while creating a deterrent going forward.

The costs of either operation will be high. But the costs of inaction since Israel abandoned Gaza in 2005 have also been high, especially in allowing Hamas to build an army of some 15,000 men. Hamas now has missiles that can hit targets 20 miles inside Israel, leaving the entire south of the country vulnerable, and on present course longer-range missiles will eventually hit Tel Aviv. Whether or not Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is willing to reassert control of Gaza, Hamas has to be destroyed as a military force.

For the broader Middle East, the issue is the expansion of Iranian influence and terror. Like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Sadrist “special groups” in Iraq, Hamas has become part of Tehran’s bid for regional hegemony. The Bush Administration’s regional setbacks in 2006 went far to encourage that Iranian ambition, though the surge has contained it in Iraq. Hezbollah remains stronger than ever in Lebanon, however, and Hamas has been pressing to humble Israel with an eye to deposing Mr. Abbas’s Palestinian Authority on the West Bank as it has in Gaza.

This is where Mr. Obama comes in. The Bush Administration has rightly given Israel the diplomatic cover it needs to pursue its war aims, amid the usual Arab, European and U.N. denunciations. Similar denunciations were of course never aimed at Hamas missiles fired at Israeli civilians. As Israel’s operation continues, the clamor will build for the U.S. to force Israel to stop short of defeating Hamas. Such an intervention by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice allowed Hezbollah to claim victory in 2006, and Mr. Obama should not repeat the same mistake.

Much as Mr. Obama takes office in a stronger position thanks to the Iraq surge, his foreign policy would also benefit from Israeli success in Gaza. The President-elect says he intends to pursue a grand bargain with Iran, [NAIVE] and the mullahs are going to be more interested in diplomacy if their military proxies have been defeated. A Hamas humiliation would also show Tehran that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s regional militarism has more costs than benefits.

The Israelis have done Mr. Obama a favor by striking back at Hamas before he takes office so President Bush can endure the usual global denunciations for U.S. support for Israel. But Mr. Obama will soon need to return the favor by showing Israel — and Iran — that the new President understands the U.S. stake in the success of Israel’s Gaza surge.

h1

Hamas??? Get the hint….

January 12, 2009

h1

Pro-Israel Rally Pictures

January 12, 2009

Pro-Israel Rally Pictures from Detroit – 8 January 2008 – Federal Court Building.100_1254100_1246100_1248100_1252

h1

IMPORTANT: Mideast Peace Possible Only If Hamas Loses

January 9, 2009

IMPORTANT – TO – READ.

ISRAEL MUST NOT STOP UNTIL HAMAS IS DESTROYED

Mideast Peace Possible Only If Hamas Loses

By CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER | Posted Thursday, January 08, 2009 4:20 PM PT

Israel’s leaders have purposely obscured their war aims in Gaza. But there are only two possible endgames: (A) a Lebanon-like cessation of hostilities to be supervised by international observers, or (B) the disintegration of Hamas rule in Gaza.

Under tremendous international pressure — including from an increasingly wobbly U.S. State Department — the government of Ehud Olmert has begun hinting that it is receptive to a French-Egyptian cease-fire plan, essentially acquiescing to Endgame A.

That would be a terrible mistake.

It would fail on its own terms. It would have the same elements as the phony peace in Lebanon: an international force that abjures any meaningful use of force, an arms embargo under which arms will most assuredly flood in, and a cessation of hostilities until the terrorist side is rearmed and ready to initiate the next round of hostilities.

The U.N.-mandated disarmament of Hezbollah in Lebanon is a well-known farce. Not only have foreign forces not stopped Hezbollah’s massive rearmament. Their very presence makes it impossible for Israel to take any preventive military action, lest it accidentally hit a blue-helmeted Belgian crossing guard.

The “international community” is now pushing very hard for a replay in Gaza of that charade. Does anyone imagine that international monitors will risk their lives to prevent weapons smuggling? To arrest terrorists? To engage in shootouts with rocket-launching teams attacking Israeli civilians across the Gaza border?

Of course not. Weapons will continue to be smuggled. Deeper and more secure fortifications will be built for the next round. Mosques, schools and hospitals will again be used for weapons storage and terrorist safe havens. Do you think French “peacekeepers” are going to raid them?

Which is why the only acceptable outcome of this war, both for Israel and for the civilized world, is Endgame B: the disintegration of Hamas rule. It is already under way.

This is not about killing every last Hamas gunman. Not possible, not necessary. Regimes rule not by physically overpowering every person in their domain, but by getting the majority to accept their authority. That is what sustains Hamas, and that is what is now under massive assault.

Hamas’ leadership is not only seriously degraded but openly humiliated. The great warriors urging others to martyrdom are cowering underground almost entirely incommunicado. Demonstrably unable to protect their own people, they beg for outside help, receiving in return nothing but words from their Arab and Iranian brothers.

And who in fact is providing the corridors for humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians? Israel.

In the first four minutes of this war, the Israel Air Force destroyed 50 targets, taking down practically every instrument and symbol of Hamas rule. Gaza’s Potemkin leaders were marginalized and rendered helpless, leaving their people to fend for themselves.

At such moments, regimes are extremely vulnerable to forfeiting what the Chinese call the mandate of heaven, the sense of legitimacy that undergirds all forms of governance.

The fall of Hamas rule in Gaza is within reach, but only if Israel does not cave in to pressure to stop now. Overthrowing Hamas would not require a permanent Israeli reoccupation.

A transitional international force would be brought in to immediately make way for the return of the Palestinian Authority, the legitimate government whose forces will be far less squeamish than the Europeans in establishing order in Gaza.

The disintegration of Hamas rule in Gaza would be a devastating blow to Palestinian rejectionists, who since the Hamas takeover of Gaza have been the ascendant “strong horse” in Palestinian politics.

It would be a devastating blow to Iran as patron of radical Islamist movements throughout the region, particularly after the defeat and marginalization of Iran’s Sadrist client in Iraq. It would encourage the moderate Arab states to continue their U.S.-allied confrontation of Iran and its proxies. And it would demonstrate Israel’s irreplaceable strategic value to the U.S. in curbing and containing Iran’s regional ambitions.

Olmert had such an opportunity in Lebanon. He blew it. He now has a rare second chance. The one-step-from-madness gangster theocracy in Gaza — just four days before the fighting, the Hamas parliament passed a Shariah criminal code, legalizing, among other niceties, crucifixion — is teetering on the brink.

It can be brought down, but only if Israel is prepared — and allowed — to complete the real mission of this war. For the Bush State Department, in its last significant act, to prevent that with the premature imposition of a cease-fire would be not just self-defeating but shameful.

© 2008 Washington Post Writers Group

h1

CAIR’s Silence on Hamas

January 9, 2009

CAIR’s Silence on Hamas

IPT News
January 7, 2009

http://www.investigativeproject.org/article/969

Shortly after Israel started bombing Hamas targets in Gaza, four leaders of national Muslim-American organizations gathered at the National Press Club to condemn the violence.

Their language was nuanced, with calls for an “even-handed” U.S. policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. When they were specific, their criticism went in one direction. Nihad Awad, a co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and its executive director, was the most pointed:

“And we demand that our government, the U.S. government, take immediate steps to end the immoral and illegal Israeli bombardment of Gaza and its population which has already resulted in more than 300 deaths, including many women and children.”

“Israel has to comply with international law. Israel has to respect the sanctity of human lives, and Israel has to respect its allies.”

One word was never mentioned: Hamas.

For years, CAIR officials have refused to condemn Hamas by name or call on it to cease terror attacks in the name of peace. Now they won’t even say the terror group’s name.

It’s not just Awad. CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper was interviewed on CNN just after the news conference and was asked whether “making Hamas irrelevant in the region” would help improve life for the Palestinian people. His response made no reference to the terrorist group:

“Well what you want to do is give the Palestinians an idea that their future can be better. That their children can actually eat. Can you imagine right now, in the twenty first century, that we have a situation where there is a blockade keeping children from eating in any part of the world and America is supporting that blockade. It’s outrageous, it’s illegal, it’s immoral and it’s against international law. At a minimum we have to end the siege of the Gaza ghetto.”

CAIR-Los Angeles Executive Director Hussam Ayloush issued a statement on Dec. 30 echoing his national leaders:

“We demand that our government take immediate steps to end the immoral and illegal Israeli bombardment of Gaza. We also demand the Bush administration join with the international community in seeking the end to the savage collective punishment of the people of Gaza.”

Where international conflict fits in with CAIR’s stated mission isn’t entirely clear. The mission statement says CAIR seeksto enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.”

When it delves into international politics, it consistently sides with radical Islamists. In 1994, Awad publicly expressed his support for Hamas. Earlier that year, he called out editors at The Message, an American-Muslim publication, for simply using the term “Israel.”

“I hope,” he wrote, “that the use of ‘Israel’ in your news briefs was the result of an oversight and not intentional…Furthermore I hope you will return to the terminology ‘Occupied Palestine’ to refer to that Holy Land.”

Israel assassinated two Hamas leaders in the spring of 2004 in the wake of ongoing terrorist attacks. CAIR issued statements condemning the acts and, like now, concealing the terrorist movement’s role in precipitating them. Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin was mourned as a “wheelchair-bound Palestinian religious leader.” Yassin’s successor, Abdel Aziz Rantisi, was described by CAIR merely as “a political leader.”

Past behavior is relevant in assessing CAIR’s current stand. If the objective truly is to help the people of Gaza, demanding that Hamas cease its daily firing of missiles into Israeli cities is required. But that is not what is happening.

At this point, it bears repeating that internal Muslim Brotherhood records show Awad and his organization were part of a Brotherhood effort to help Hamas in the U.S. That’s why CAIR was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas-support trial of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development and why FBI case agent Lara Burns testified CAIR is a front group.

Exhibits in evidence in the show the foundation served as the Hamas fundraising arm in the United States and CAIR officials often participated in fundraisers for it. In November 2008, jurors convicted the foundation and five former officials on all 108 counts against them. In a statement, CAIR dismissed the verdict as “based more on fear-mongering than on the facts.”

But CAIR’s statements about the Gaza conflict are straight out of the playbook designed during a secret meeting of Hamas members and supporters held in Philadelphia in the fall of 1993. The stated purpose of the meeting was to find ways to “derail” the U.S.-brokered Oslo Accords, which led to the creation of a Palestinian Authority and was considered an important step toward a peaceful, two-state solution to the conflict.

The two-dozen men assembled had two principal reasons for opposing the Accords. The new PA was dominated by their competitors — the secular Fatah movement — and they were concerned any success would marginalize the Islamist Hamas. And, as the Hamas Charter states, a negotiated, peaceful settlement that leaves Israel a viable state is unacceptable.

Records and FBI surveillance tapes show Awad presented a report in Philadelphia on “political, media, popular action and public relations in North America.” During a 2003 deposition, Awad claimed he couldn’t remember whether he attended the meeting. In his presentation, Awad refers to “Samah,” the simple code name meeting participants agreed to use instead of saying “Hamas” – its inverse – out loud. He also describes how the group can get its message out through the media:

“If you hear of a false rumor, you want to discredit it, huh? If people need money we would provide media coverage. We encourage people to donate to you. If there is a political issue, a Samah’s input for instance, about this or that, we inform people to contact their representatives, I mean…the [unintelligible] and others, print circulations and send them to them.”

Now, fast forward to today. CAIR chapters throughout the country are urging followers to lobby members of Congress with a unilateral focus. And they are soliciting people to sign petitions, which, in classic CAIR code, note:

“all parties in the Middle East conflict have committed violence against civilians. We unequivocally condemn all of these actions.”

In reality, though, they do not. No CAIR official has called on Hamas to stop firing rockets into Israeli cities and no CAIR official has criticized Hamas for placing Palestinian civilians in harm’s way.

Contrast that with criticisms of Hamas from the Palestinian Authority, Palestinians in Gaza and even Iranian students. In a statement issued Dec. 30, the group Daftar-e Tahkim-e Vahdat said:

“Those who have armed and encouraged groups like Hamas – which only yesterday did not hide its sympathy for the criminal Saddam Hussein, and which declared three days of mourning after his death – have innocent blood on their hands: [the blood of those killed] in the [recent] hostilities [in Gaza]. Now it is they who must be accountable to humanity, and it is they who must explain this tragic situation.”

The group criticized the Israeli invasion, too, but added “it is equally [important] to condemn the terror organizations that use kindergartens and hospitals as a shield against the [Israeli] attacks. [Hamas's use of human shields] prepares the ground for intensified bombardment [by Israel] and for the killing of children and civilians, and [therefore] it is an inhuman act.”

The next day, the Iranian government shut down a newspaper which published parts of the Daftar-e Takhim-e Vahdat statement. Neither the statement nor the newspaper’s closing has received much attention in the United States.

All of it casts doubt on just how committed CAIR really is to sparing Palestinian civilians from the violence. If there were no Hamas rockets being fired, there would be no Israeli invasion of Gaza. Can anyone say otherwise with a straight face?

h1

Pro-Hamas Rally, Detroit

January 9, 2009

WARNING: THIS IS AN ANTI-ISRAEL VIDEO – RALLY FROM DETROIT, MICHIGAN 8 JANUARY 2008.

WE SUPPORT ISRAEL!!! GOD BLESS ISRAEL!!

israel_flag

“Where are these people when Hamas rains down rockets on sleeping Israeli children, one after the other?”

h1

Why Does The New York Times Love Hamas?

January 6, 2009

Why Does The New York Times Love Hamas?

By Steve Emerson
The Daily Beast
TheDailyBeast.com

January 6, 2008

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-06/why-does-the-times-love-hamas

The IPT accepts no funding from outside the United States, or from any governmental agency or political or religious institutions. Therefore we are totally dependent on American donations for keeping our operations going. We are the only non profit counter-terrorist group in the country that is conducting primary and exhaustive investigations into the operations, modus operandi and funding of radical Islamist groups here and their ties abroad. We also work to identify genuine Islamic moderates who we provide venues to speak out. Would you consider increasing your gift if you are already a donor, becoming a new one if you have not given, or contributing any type of equity for which you will get a tax deduction and avoid capital gains? Again, we are totally dependent on you. Your support of The Investigative Project on Terrorism is critical in winning a battle we cannot afford to lose. All donations are tax-deductible. Click here to donate online. The Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation is a recognized 501(c)3 organization.

h1

Missiles From Gaza

January 6, 2009

A video from a friend in Israel – “15 Seconds”

http://sderot.aish.com/SderotPetitions/MissilesFromGaza.php

h1

not a crazy right-winger

January 6, 2009

Israel’s Policy Is Perfectly ‘Proportionate’

Hamas are the real war criminals in this conflict.

By ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ

Israel’s actions in Gaza are justified under international law, and Israel should be commended for its self-defense against terrorism. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter reserves to every nation the right to engage in self-defense against armed attacks. The only limitation international law places on a democracy is that its actions must satisfy the principle of proportionality.

Since Israel ended its occupation of Gaza, Hamas has fired thousands of rockets designed to kill civilians into southern Israel. The residents of Sderot — which have borne the brunt of the attacks — have approximately 15 seconds from launch time to run into a shelter. Although deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime, terrorists firing at Sderot are so proud of their actions that they sign their weapons.

When Barack Obama visited Sderot this summer and saw the remnants of these rockets, he reacted by saying that if his two daughters were exposed to rocket attacks in their home, he would do everything in his power to stop such attacks. He understands how the terrorists exploit the morality of democracies.

In a recent incident related to me by the former head of the Israeli air force, Israeli intelligence learned that a family’s house in Gaza was being used to manufacture rockets. The Israeli military gave the residents 30 minutes to leave. Instead, the owner called Hamas, which sent mothers carrying babies to the house.

Hamas knew that Israel would never fire at a home with civilians in it. They also knew that if Israeli authorities did not learn there were civilians in the house and fired on it, Hamas would win a public relations victory by displaying the dead. Israel held its fire. The Hamas rockets that were protected by the human shields were then used against Israeli civilians.

These despicable tactics targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind Palestinian civilians — can only work against moral democracies that care deeply about minimizing civilian casualties. They never work against amoral nations such as Russia, whose military has few inhibitions against killing civilians among whom enemy combatants are hiding.

The claim that Israel has violated the principle of proportionality — by killing more Hamas terrorists than the number of Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets — is absurd. First, there is no legal equivalence between the deliberate killing of innocent civilians and the deliberate killings of Hamas combatants. Under the laws of war, any number of combatants can be killed to prevent the killing of even one innocent civilian.

Second, proportionality is not measured by the number of civilians actually killed, but rather by the risk posed. This is illustrated by what happened on Tuesday, when a Hamas rocket hit a kindergarten in Beer Sheva, though no students were there at the time. Under international law, Israel is not required to allow Hamas to play Russian roulette with its children’s lives.

While Israel installs warning systems and builds shelters, Hamas refuses to do so, precisely because it wants to maximize the number of Palestinian civilians inadvertently killed by Israel’s military actions. Hamas knows from experience that even a small number of innocent Palestinian civilians killed inadvertently will result in bitter condemnation of Israel by many in the international community.

Israel understands this as well. It goes to enormous lengths to reduce the number of civilian casualties — even to the point of foregoing legitimate targets that are too close to civilians.

Until the world recognizes that Hamas is committing three war crimes — targeting Israeli civilians, using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and seeking the destruction of a member state of the United Nations — and that Israel is acting in self-defense and out of military necessity, the conflict will continue.

Mr. Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard. His latest book is “The Case Against Israel’s Enemies” (Wiley, 2008).

h1

Will Obama cut Israel off at the knees in Gaza?

January 5, 2009


BAM STIRS FEARS IN ISRAEL

By RALPH PETERS

January 1, 2009

AS WORLD leaders and international organizations rush to rescue Hamas, Israel faces complex battlefield challenges – while fearing a stab in the back from the incoming Obama administration.

Israel’s leaders are asking themselves two questions: Is the cost of sending sufficient ground forces into Gaza just too high? And, upon his inauguration on Jan. 20, will President Obama undercut Israel’s counterterror offensive before its goals have been reached?

MY COMMENTS: Israel already sent tanks.  Pray for Israel
Israel can deal with self-aggrandizing busybodies, such as French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose irresponsible attempts to force a cease-fire upon Israel benefit only Hamas. (Carla, can’t you give that guy something to do?) But Israel would be hard pressed to fight on without American support.

As government leaders and generals in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv weigh the question of whether or not to send tanks into Gaza’s streets, they hear the clock ticking. A major ground incursion would take time. Would Israel Defense Forces soldiers find themselves fighting on political quicksand?

Despite the frankly anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish reporting of this conflict in the global media, Israel’s military performance not only has been technically superb, but has been as humane as possible under such difficult circumstances.

From earlier briefings in Israel, I know the IDF takes an almost absurd degree of care in its targeting. The questioning doesn’t stop with “Is that the right building?” it then asks, “What should be our angle of attack to ensure any rubble falls into the street, not atop the primary school next door?” (Hamas consistently embeds terror facilities among innocent civilians.)

Hitting a terrorist hideout in an apartment building, for example, an F-16 would be armed with the smallest warhead that could do the job. If the terrorists are tucked into rooms on the fourth floor, targeting officers evaluate which window the guided missile should go through to kill the terrorists, while minimizing harm to civilians living below.

Any military veteran can tell that the Israelis are taking enormous care to spare civilians. Given the number of airstrikes thus far and the hundreds of tons of bombs dropped, it remains remarkable that so few innocents have been injured in such a dense urban environment.

But, as this column has stressed for years, fighting terrorists effectively means going in on the ground – and sooner is better than later. You can’t impress fanatics into surrendering. You have to kill them. Nothing else works.

Let me repeat that: You have to kill fanatics. Nothing else works.

Ordinarily, Israeli leaders would only need to ponder battlefield costs and counter international pro-terror propaganda. But the rise of President-elect Obama complicates matters gravely.

Even the timing of Israel’s strike at Hamas has been driven, at least in part, by the coming power transfer in Washington. The immediate trigger was the hundreds of Hamas rocket attacks on Israel after the terrorists refused to renew an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire, but Israel’s leaders also counted on steadfast support from the Bush administration in its final days.

Obama’s an unknown quantity, though. While hysterical claims that he’ll be pro-Islamist from start to finish are absurd, even minor shifts away from supporting Israel’s struggle against terrorists could have catastrophic consequences. And Israel’s vaunted intelligence services can’t tell their superiors what Obama will do, since few (if any) of the president-elect’s supporters know what he intends to do.

In fact, the president-elect may not know himself. He’s a babe in the woods, and the woods are full of wolves. Fighting political rivals doesn’t prepare you for fighting terrorist fanatics.

For now, Israel must worry that a major ground offensive against Hamas would be halted halfway by the withdrawal of US support, both diplomatic and practical. The IDF even counts on us to replenish reserve stocks of the guided weapons that minimize civilian casual ties or penetrate tunnels and bunkers. Israel could find that it had paid a grim price in the blood of its sons and daughters, only to be robbed of the chance to hand Hamas a meaningful defeat.

As for our president-elect, his all-too-coy insistence that “we have only one president at a time” has been selective from the start. Glad to pontificate on stimulus packages and union benefits, Obama has used the one-president mantra to avoid taking stands on difficult issues that bedevil or bewilder him.

Our president-elect needed to make a clear, prompt statement in support of Israel. He didn’t. If I were an Israeli leader, I’d be worried, too.

Obama’s has a notorious reputation for avoiding firm stands that might alienate any important constituency. But you can’t have it both ways in the Middle East. He needs to stand up in support of Israel. Now.

Israeli soldiers should not have to go into battle worrying about an American bullet in the back.

h1

The Outrage – Israel/Hamas

December 31, 2008
The outcry???!!!

The outcry???!!!

I think we know the opinion of the middle east.

h1

Israel Vows Fight ‘To The Bitter End’

December 30, 2008

Unsaid in this article from IBD – Israel made 12,000-15,000 cell phone calls to Palestinians – prior to any attack – telling them to leave – that weapons and weapons storage areas will be targeted.*

Don

Israel Continues Assault On Gaza Strip, Vows To Fight Hamas ‘To The Bitter End’

IBD – 30 December 2008

Israel obliterated symbols of Hamas power in the Gaza Strip on the third day of what the Israeli defense minister described Monday as a “war to the bitter end,” striking next to the Hamas premier’s home and devastating a security compound and a university building.

The three-day death toll rose to 364 on Monday, with some 1,400 reported wounded. The U.N. said at least 62 of the dead were civilians, and medics said eight children under the age of 17 were killed in two separate strikes overnight. Israel launched its campaign, the deadliest against Palestinians in decades, on Saturday in retaliation for rocket fire aimed at civilians in southern Israeli towns.

Since then, the number of Israeli troops on the Gaza border has doubled and the Cabinet approved the call-up of 6,500 reserve soldiers.

Militants Launch Rockets

The strikes have driven Hamas leaders into hiding, but Palestinians militants continued to battle back. Sirens warning of incoming rockets sent Israelis scrambling for cover throughout the day.

One medium-range rocket fired at the Israeli city of Ashkelon killed an Arab construction worker and wounded several others. He was the second Israeli killed since the beginning of the offensive.

At first light Monday, strong winds blew black smoke from the bombed sites over Gaza City’s deserted streets. The air hummed with the buzz of drone aircraft and the roar of jets, punctuated by airstrike explosions. Palestinian health officials said one strike killed four Islamic Jihad militants and a child.

Some Palestinians ventured outside for mourning. In northern Gaza, a father lifted the body of his 4-year-old during a funeral Monday for five children from the same family killed in an Israeli missile strike.

On Sunday, Hamas missiles struck for the first time near the city of Ashdod, only 25 miles from Israel’s heart in Tel Aviv. Hamas leaders have also threatened to renew suicide attacks inside Israel. A missile from Gaza struck Ashdod again on Monday, seriously wounding two people.

U.S. Backs Israel

The White House released a statement Monday saying “in order for the violence to stop, Hamas must stop firing rockets into Israel and agree to respect a sustainable and durable cease-fire.”

But in Damascus, Syria, an exiled Hamas official said there could be no talk of a truce with Israel until the assault ended and Israel reopened the Gaza crossings.

“We need our liberty, we need our freedom, and we need to be independent,” said Abu Marzouk.

A six-month truce between Hamas and Israel expired earlier this month as Hamas refused to extend it, accusing Israel of violating its terms.

Most of those killed since Saturday were members of Hamas security forces, though the precise numbers remain unclear. A Hamas police spokesman, Ehab Ghussen, said 180 members of the Hamas security forces were among the dead, and the U.N. said at least 62 of the dead were civilians. A rise in civilian casualties could intensify international pressure on Israel to end the offensive.

Ehud Barak, the Israeli defense minister, told parliament that Israel was not fighting Gaza residents. “But we have a war to the bitter end against Hamas and its branches,” he said. Barak said the goal was to deal Hamas a “severe blow” and the operation would be “widened and deepened as needed.”

Israel’s intense bombings — more than 300 airstrikes since midday Saturday — reduced dozens of buildings in Gaza to rubble. The military said naval vessels also bombarded targets from the sea.

At the United Nations, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon accused Israel of using excessive force and called for an immediate cease-fire.

One Israeli strike destroyed a five-story building in the women’s wing at Islamic University, one of the most prominent Hamas symbols in Gaza. Other attacks ravaged a compound controlled by Hamas’ chief security forces and destroyed a house next to the residence of Ismail Haniyeh, the Hamas prime minister.

Hospitals Overwhelmed

Gaza’s nine hospitals struggled to care for the injured. Hassanain, who keeps a record for the Gaza Health Ministry, said that some of the over 1,400 wounded were now being taken to private clinics and even homes.

In Israel, 17 people have been killed in attacks from Gaza since the beginning of the year, including nine civilians — six of them killed by rockets — and eight soldiers, according to Israel’s Foreign Ministry.

In Jerusalem, Israel’s Cabinet approved a call-up of 6,500 reserve soldiers Sunday in apparent preparation for a ground offensive. Military experts said Israel would need at least 10,000 soldiers for a full-scale invasion.

The conflict inflamed Arabs and Muslims, setting off street protests across the Arab world and in some European cities.

—–

excerpt from: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28397813/

Cell-phone warnings
Militants often operate against Israel from civilian areas. Late Saturday, *thousands of Gazans received Arabic-language cell-phone messages from the Israeli military, urging them to leave homes where militants might have stashed weapons.”