Friday, November 23, 2012

Mordechai Kedar: Hamas - Between the Israeli Hammer and the Iranian Anvil



by Mordechai Kedar

Read the article in Italiano (translated by Yehudit Weisz, edited by Angelo Pezzana)

The real, profound reason for the current violence between Israel and the Gaza Strip stems from the nature of the relationship between Hamas and Iran, which is directly involved in the events that occur in Gaza. 

Ever since the regime of Saddam Hussein was toppled in Iraq in April 2003, Iran has served as the main support for Hamas, because the Hamas movement continued the jihad against Israel, in contrast to the PLO, which signed the Oslo Accords and surrendered – according to the Iranian view – the struggle to liberate Palestine.   For years, Iran has been sending weapons, ammunition, money and equipment, to the fighters of Hamas in the Gaza Strip, by the northern route via Syria, Lebanon and the sea, and by the southern route via Sudan, Egypt and Sinai. Syria gave the leaders of Hamas – mainly Khaled Meshaal – safe haven in Damascus from where the jihad against Israel could be conducted, and there was full coordination between the Syrian regime and Hamas. Hizb’Allah was enlisted to support Hamas in any way that was requested. Thus Hamas became an inseparable part of the coalition that Iran built in the Arab world, and the fact that Hamas people are Sunni and Iran and Hizb’Allah are Shi’ite did not disturb Hamas.

In January 2006 Hamas won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council, but friction and disagreements with the PLO prevented the transfer of the reins of power to Hamas. A series of clashes between the organizations in the Gaza Strip gave rise in February 2007 to the “Mecca Agreement”, which was implemented, but did not prevent Hamas from taking over the Gaza Strip in June 2007 with blood and fire, when they eliminated members of security forces of the Palestinian Authority by shooting them in their heads and knees. Some of them were thrown down to the street from high-rise buildings that they had fled to in an attempt to escape. Since then Hamas has been in total control of Gaza, but has allowed other organizations to act, train arm themselves and attack Israel from time to time. That is why organizations such as Islamic Jihad, Popular Resistance Committees, the Army of the Nation, the Army of Islam, the Salah-a-Din Brigades and others are active in the Gaza Strip. As long as their action against Israel was within acceptable limits, the Hamas government closed its eyes because it did not want to be perceived as the Israeli “Border Police”.

Meanwhile Hamas has established in Gaza a system a totally functional system of governmental administration: police, military, military industry with the ability to create missiles, a legal system, a for legislative mechanism with an Islamic character, and offices of health, education and infrastructure. The leaders of Hamas travel the world as heads of state and are received as desired guests in Moscow and in most Arab capitals. In Iran also, the heads of Hamas have visited more than a few times. The connection with Iran continues and Iran has continued to arm Hamas with missiles that everyone knew were intended to harm the citizens of Israel.

The change in relations between Hamas and Iran started in March 2011, when the demonstrations against the regime in Syria began. The regime is struggling with very violent demonstrations; its forces are shooting into groups of demonstrators, causing fatalities among the unarmed citizenry. Most of the citizens killed were Sunni Muslims, while the ‘Alawite regime is an offshoot of Shi’ite Islam. The sectarian character of the Syrian conflict is emphasized by the fact that Shi’ites – Iran and Hizb’Allah - support the regime. Since the riots in Syria began – which developed within a few months into open violence on both sides – the Syrian regime has demanded from the leaders  of Hamas, principally those in Syria, to express support for the regime and even to support it with fighters who would act against the demonstrators, just as Hizb’Allah sent snipers to Syria for the same reason.

The leaders of Sunni Hamas can not express support for the heretical ‘Alawite regime that is slaughtering Sunni citizens with the help of Shi’ites, whether because it is a betrayal of their brothers or because of the fear that the Sunni citizens would take revenge on them by harming the Palestinian refugees in Syria; but on the other hand they also could not express support for the Sunni population because then the regime would harm them and their refugee brothers . For several months Khaled Meshaal sat “on the fence” in the hope that the demonstrations would stop and save him from having to express support for one of the sides, but this did not happen –the opposite occurred: the hostile acts between the warring sides in Syria only increased, and as they increased so did the pressure on Meshaal from the both sides. The Iranians and the Syrian regime expected Meshaal to pay Asad back for the many long years that Syria supported Hamas with weapons, ammunition and money, but he did not give  them this support.

This is why he had to leave Damascus and to evacuate the offices of Hamas, and since then he has been wandering mainly in Qatar and Egypt which meanwhile has become the capital of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas’s parent movement. Iran has decreased its support of Hamas, because Hamas has put away the flag of jihad and because it has busied itself in recent years with state building in Gaza. Iran has turned its support to rogue organizations, mainly Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees, who have made life difficult for Hamas as Hamas used to do to the PLO.

Meanwhile the crisis in Syria has evolved into a regional conflict in which the Shiite coalition – Iran, Iraq and Hizb’Allah – supports the regime of Asad, and a Sunni coalition – Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt – support the Sunni citizens. Qatar is leading this coalition, mainly in order to fend off the Iranians, who are threatening the Gulf Emirates. The Emir of Qatar, the most powerful man in the Arab world, who leads the Sunni Arab world against the Shi’ite coalition under the leadership of Iran, went for a state visit in the Gaza Strip last month, on the 23rd of October. This visit marked the acceptance of the state of Gaza, under the government of Hamas, as a full member of the Sunni coalition, and in return, the emir of Qatar promised a grant of 450 million dollars to develop the infrastructure in Gaza.

The visit and the money from Qatar were an additional nail in the coffin for Iran-Hamas relations, because the money represents a long-term commitment on the part of the Hamas government to be part of the Sunni, anti-Iranian coalition, headed by the emir of Qatar. Hamas’ betrayal of Iran raised the ire of the Iranians, who instructed their new friends in Gaza, the people of the Palestinian Resistance Committees and Islamic Jihad, to escalate the situation with Israel in order to harm the master of Gaza, Hamas. On the 10th of November they shot an anti-tank missile at a jeep that was patrolling a road within Israeli territory, and three soldiers were injured. This Satanic Iranian plan succeeded beyond expectations: after a few days of bad weather (it is difficult for unmanned drones to function in windy, rainy weather) Israel began a large-scale air operation against the Hamas infrastructure, exactly as Iran had planned.

The Iranian spokesmen expressed – of course – objection to the “barbaric” steps that Israel had taken, and even expressed support for Hamas, but it is clear that this support is just lip service, because in the Iranian view Israel is doing their dirty work for them, avenging the betrayal of Hamas after Iran had supported it for years and after Hamas had even crossed lines and joined forces with Qatar.

The Sunni coalition understood exactly what was happening and stepped in immediately to support its brothers in Gaza: last Saturday, the 17th of November, the leaders of this coalition – the emir of Qatar, Erdoğan and President Mursi - came to Cairo in order to consult with each other on how to rescue Hamas from the Israeli hammer that was pounding it from above, and from the Iranian anvil – the organizations that oppose Hamas in Gaza. Everyone knows that Hamas has neither the desire nor the capability to act decisively against the organizations that oppose it, because taking decisive action against them will only provide them with propaganda ammunition and they will be able to claim that Hamas has become the “Israeli Border Police”, the twin of the PLO’s Palestinian Authority, which has abandoned jihad in exchange for jobs and salaries.

I don’t know if Israel immediately understood what Iran has done. This caused Israel to be faced with two opposing possibilities: one is that Hamas may actually serve Israeli interests by breaking off part of the Palestinian Authority and establishing a Palestinian state in Gaza, and therefore it would be better to focus the attack on the rogue organizations instead of taking action against Hamas. The other approach is: since Hamas took control of Gaza, it must be seen as responsible for everything that originates from there, so if someone fires a missile at an Israeli jeep, then Hamas is responsible for it even if Hamas had no part in it. According to this approach, Gaza is already functioning as a state, and therefore it must be held accountable for any attack on Israel that originates from Gaza, because if they really wanted to, they could shut down all of the rogue organizations and confiscate their weapons.

And now, since Israel has decided on a wide-scale operation against Hamas and the other organizations, it must assure in any agreement reached that Iran will no longer be able to arm its friends in Gaza, and Egypt will finally begin to take serious action against the smuggling of weapons and missiles from its territory to the Strip, and if Mursi decides to open the Rafah Crossing, he must check every truck carefully to be sure that missiles are not hidden underneath the food.

It could be that given the present alignment of powers, in which some neighboring countries fear Iran no less than we do, we can act together with these neighboring countries instead of against them, because “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. The state of Hamas in Gaza, if it lives beside us peacefully, can be part of the anti-Iranian alignment. Israel should have a dialogue with the Egyptian government, behind the scenes, of course, about the way all of the inhabitants of the area, including the Hamas movement, can together cope with the great threat – Iran and its friends – instead of falling into the trap that Iran is preparing for its opponents and those who have abandoned and betrayed it. 

 ===============

Dr. Kedar is available for lectures


Dr. Mordechai Kedar
(Mordechai.Kedar@biu.ac.il) is an Israeli scholar of Arabic and Islam, a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University and the director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), Bar Ilan University, Israel. He specializes in Islamic ideology and movements, the political discourse of Arab countries, the Arabic mass media, and the Syrian domestic arena.

Translated from Hebrew by Sally Zahav with the permission of the author.


Links to Dr. Kedar's recent articles on this blog:



Source: The article is published in the framework of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), Bar Ilan University, Israel. Also published in Makor Rishon, a Hebrew weekly newspaper.

Copyright
- Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Egypt President Morsi Grants Himself Far-Reaching Powers



by Associated Press


CAIRO –  Egypt's president on Thursday issued constitutional amendments that placed him above judicial oversight and ordered the retrial of Hosni Mubarak for the killing of protesters in last year's uprising.

Mohammed Morsi also decreed immunity for the Islamist-dominated panel drafting a new constitution from any possible court decisions to dissolve it, a threat that had been hanging over the controversial assembly.

Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Morsi's allies, who they saw are trying to push through a document that will have an Islamist slant marginalizing women and minority Christians and infringing on personal liberties. Several courts have been looking into cases demanding the dissolution of the panel.

The Egyptian leader also decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected -- which is not expected before next spring -- are not subject to appeal in court or by any other authority. He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.

The moves effectively remove any oversight on Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure who became Egypt's first freely elected president last summer after the Feb. 11, 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They come as Morsi is riding high on lavish praise from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.

Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood. With two branches of power in his hands, Morsi has had repeated frictions with the third, the judiciary, over recent months.

"Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh," pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account. "A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences."

The president made most of the changes Thursday by issuing a declaration amending what has become a patchwork interim constitution in effect since Mubarak's fall. The military, which took power after Mubarak, set the precedent for the executive unilaterally issuing constitutional changes, which it did several times during its 16-month rule.

Morsi on Thursday extended by two months the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft for a new constitution, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.

The moves are likely to fuel growing public criticism that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood have monopolized power while doing little to tackle the country's endemic woes. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Cairo for the fourth day running to protest against Morsi's policies and criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, the fundamentalist group from which the Egyptian leader hails.

The decree for a retrial of Mubarak appeared aimed at making a gesture to the public. The decree called for "new investigations and trials" against those who held "political or executive" positions in the old regime and who are accused of killing protesters.

Mubarak was convicted in June to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of protesters during last year's uprising against his rule, but many Egyptians were angered that he wasn't convicted of actually ordering the crackdown and that his security chief, Habib el-Adly, was not sentenced to death. Several top police commanders were acquitted, and Mubarak and his sons were found not guilty of corruption charges.

But the decree would not mean retrials for the dozens of lower-level police officers who have been acquitted or received suspended sentences in trials for killing protesters -- verdicts that have outraged many Egyptians.

That exclusion will guarantee Morsi the loyalty of the powerful but hated police force which had abandoned the streets for more than a year after Mubarak's ouster by a popular uprising motivated in large part by the human rights violations of the police and the notorious security services.

Morsi on Thursday also fired the country's top prosecutor, Abdel-Maguid Mahmoud, who has been in the job since 2006. A Mubarak-era appointee, Mahmoud has faced widespread accusations that his office did a shoddy job collecting evidence against Mubarak, el-Adly and the police commanders.

Morsi first fired Mahmoud in October but had to rescind his decision when he found that the powers of his office do not empower him to do so. So on Thursday, he decreed that the prosecutor general could serve in office only for four years, with immediate effect. Morsi replaced Mahmoud with Talaat Abdullah, a career judge.

Shortly before Morsi's decisions were announced, hundreds of Morsi supporters gathered outside Mahmoud's office chanting slogans against him and demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."

Thursday's decisions were read on state television by Morsi's spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian Mubarak and his predecessor Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs. The introductions of the decrees declared that they were designed to "protect" the revolution and dismantle the old regime, a nod to the revolutionaries who have long complained that not enough was being done to reform the country after Mubarak's 29-year rule.

Morsi narrowly won the presidency -- about 52 percent of the vote -- to become Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, ending nearly six decades of de facto military rule.

Egypt's president on Thursday issued constitutional amendments that placed him above judicial oversight and ordered the retrial of Hosni Mubarak for the killing of protesters in last year's uprising.
Mohammed Morsi also decreed immunity for the Islamist-dominated panel drafting a new constitution from any possible court decisions to dissolve it, a threat that had been hanging over the controversial assembly.
Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Morsi's allies, who they saw are trying to push through a document that will have an Islamist slant marginalizing women and minority Christians and infringing on personal liberties. Several courts have been looking into cases demanding the dissolution of the panel.
The Egyptian leader also decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected -- which is not expected before next spring -- are not subject to appeal in court or by any other authority. He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.
The moves effectively remove any oversight on Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure who became Egypt's first freely elected president last summer after the Feb. 11, 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They come as Morsi is riding high on lavish praise from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.
Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood. With two branches of power in his hands, Morsi has had repeated frictions with the third, the judiciary, over recent months.
"Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh," pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account. "A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences."
The president made most of the changes Thursday by issuing a declaration amending what has become a patchwork interim constitution in effect since Mubarak's fall. The military, which took power after Mubarak, set the precedent for the executive unilaterally issuing constitutional changes, which it did several times during its 16-month rule.
Morsi on Thursday extended by two months the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft for a new constitution, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.
The moves are likely to fuel growing public criticism that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood have monopolized power while doing little to tackle the country's endemic woes. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Cairo for the fourth day running to protest against Morsi's policies and criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, the fundamentalist group from which the Egyptian leader hails.
The decree for a retrial of Mubarak appeared aimed at making a gesture to the public. The decree called for "new investigations and trials" against those who held "political or executive" positions in the old regime and who are accused of killing protesters.
Mubarak was convicted in June to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of protesters during last year's uprising against his rule, but many Egyptians were angered that he wasn't convicted of actually ordering the crackdown and that his security chief, Habib el-Adly, was not sentenced to death. Several top police commanders were acquitted, and Mubarak and his sons were found not guilty of corruption charges.
But the decree would not mean retrials for the dozens of lower-level police officers who have been acquitted or received suspended sentences in trials for killing protesters -- verdicts that have outraged many Egyptians.
That exclusion will guarantee Morsi the loyalty of the powerful but hated police force which had abandoned the streets for more than a year after Mubarak's ouster by a popular uprising motivated in large part by the human rights violations of the police and the notorious security services.
Morsi on Thursday also fired the country's top prosecutor, Abdel-Maguid Mahmoud, who has been in the job since 2006. A Mubarak-era appointee, Mahmoud has faced widespread accusations that his office did a shoddy job collecting evidence against Mubarak, el-Adly and the police commanders.
Morsi first fired Mahmoud in October but had to rescind his decision when he found that the powers of his office do not empower him to do so. So on Thursday, he decreed that the prosecutor general could serve in office only for four years, with immediate effect. Morsi replaced Mahmoud with Talaat Abdullah, a career judge.
Shortly before Morsi's decisions were announced, hundreds of Morsi supporters gathered outside Mahmoud's office chanting slogans against him and demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."
Thursday's decisions were read on state television by Morsi's spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian Mubarak and his predecessor Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs. The introductions of the decrees declared that they were designed to "protect" the revolution and dismantle the old regime, a nod to the revolutionaries who have long complained that not enough was being done to reform the country after Mubarak's 29-year rule.
Morsi narrowly won the presidency -- about 52 percent of the vote -- to become Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, ending nearly six decades of de facto military rule.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/22/egypt-president-morsi-grants-himself-far-reaching-powers/#ixzz2CzNhgzSr
Egypt's president on Thursday issued constitutional amendments that placed him above judicial oversight and ordered the retrial of Hosni Mubarak for the killing of protesters in last year's uprising.
Mohammed Morsi also decreed immunity for the Islamist-dominated panel drafting a new constitution from any possible court decisions to dissolve it, a threat that had been hanging over the controversial assembly.
Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Morsi's allies, who they saw are trying to push through a document that will have an Islamist slant marginalizing women and minority Christians and infringing on personal liberties. Several courts have been looking into cases demanding the dissolution of the panel.
The Egyptian leader also decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected -- which is not expected before next spring -- are not subject to appeal in court or by any other authority. He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.
The moves effectively remove any oversight on Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure who became Egypt's first freely elected president last summer after the Feb. 11, 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They come as Morsi is riding high on lavish praise from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.
Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood. With two branches of power in his hands, Morsi has had repeated frictions with the third, the judiciary, over recent months.
"Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh," pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account. "A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences."
The president made most of the changes Thursday by issuing a declaration amending what has become a patchwork interim constitution in effect since Mubarak's fall. The military, which took power after Mubarak, set the precedent for the executive unilaterally issuing constitutional changes, which it did several times during its 16-month rule.
Morsi on Thursday extended by two months the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft for a new constitution, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.
The moves are likely to fuel growing public criticism that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood have monopolized power while doing little to tackle the country's endemic woes. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Cairo for the fourth day running to protest against Morsi's policies and criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, the fundamentalist group from which the Egyptian leader hails.
The decree for a retrial of Mubarak appeared aimed at making a gesture to the public. The decree called for "new investigations and trials" against those who held "political or executive" positions in the old regime and who are accused of killing protesters.
Mubarak was convicted in June to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of protesters during last year's uprising against his rule, but many Egyptians were angered that he wasn't convicted of actually ordering the crackdown and that his security chief, Habib el-Adly, was not sentenced to death. Several top police commanders were acquitted, and Mubarak and his sons were found not guilty of corruption charges.
But the decree would not mean retrials for the dozens of lower-level police officers who have been acquitted or received suspended sentences in trials for killing protesters -- verdicts that have outraged many Egyptians.
That exclusion will guarantee Morsi the loyalty of the powerful but hated police force which had abandoned the streets for more than a year after Mubarak's ouster by a popular uprising motivated in large part by the human rights violations of the police and the notorious security services.
Morsi on Thursday also fired the country's top prosecutor, Abdel-Maguid Mahmoud, who has been in the job since 2006. A Mubarak-era appointee, Mahmoud has faced widespread accusations that his office did a shoddy job collecting evidence against Mubarak, el-Adly and the police commanders.
Morsi first fired Mahmoud in October but had to rescind his decision when he found that the powers of his office do not empower him to do so. So on Thursday, he decreed that the prosecutor general could serve in office only for four years, with immediate effect. Morsi replaced Mahmoud with Talaat Abdullah, a career judge.
Shortly before Morsi's decisions were announced, hundreds of Morsi supporters gathered outside Mahmoud's office chanting slogans against him and demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."
Thursday's decisions were read on state television by Morsi's spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian Mubarak and his predecessor Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs. The introductions of the decrees declared that they were designed to "protect" the revolution and dismantle the old regime, a nod to the revolutionaries who have long complained that not enough was being done to reform the country after Mubarak's 29-year rule.
Morsi narrowly won the presidency -- about 52 percent of the vote -- to become Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, ending nearly six decades of de facto military rule.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/22/egypt-president-morsi-grants-himself-far-reaching-powers/#ixzz2CzNhgzSr
Egypt's president on Thursday issued constitutional amendments that placed him above judicial oversight and ordered the retrial of Hosni Mubarak for the killing of protesters in last year's uprising.
Mohammed Morsi also decreed immunity for the Islamist-dominated panel drafting a new constitution from any possible court decisions to dissolve it, a threat that had been hanging over the controversial assembly.
Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Morsi's allies, who they saw are trying to push through a document that will have an Islamist slant marginalizing women and minority Christians and infringing on personal liberties. Several courts have been looking into cases demanding the dissolution of the panel.
The Egyptian leader also decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected -- which is not expected before next spring -- are not subject to appeal in court or by any other authority. He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.
The moves effectively remove any oversight on Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure who became Egypt's first freely elected president last summer after the Feb. 11, 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They come as Morsi is riding high on lavish praise from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.
Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood. With two branches of power in his hands, Morsi has had repeated frictions with the third, the judiciary, over recent months.
"Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh," pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account. "A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences."
The president made most of the changes Thursday by issuing a declaration amending what has become a patchwork interim constitution in effect since Mubarak's fall. The military, which took power after Mubarak, set the precedent for the executive unilaterally issuing constitutional changes, which it did several times during its 16-month rule.
Morsi on Thursday extended by two months the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft for a new constitution, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.
The moves are likely to fuel growing public criticism that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood have monopolized power while doing little to tackle the country's endemic woes. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Cairo for the fourth day running to protest against Morsi's policies and criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, the fundamentalist group from which the Egyptian leader hails.
The decree for a retrial of Mubarak appeared aimed at making a gesture to the public. The decree called for "new investigations and trials" against those who held "political or executive" positions in the old regime and who are accused of killing protesters.
Mubarak was convicted in June to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of protesters during last year's uprising against his rule, but many Egyptians were angered that he wasn't convicted of actually ordering the crackdown and that his security chief, Habib el-Adly, was not sentenced to death. Several top police commanders were acquitted, and Mubarak and his sons were found not guilty of corruption charges.
But the decree would not mean retrials for the dozens of lower-level police officers who have been acquitted or received suspended sentences in trials for killing protesters -- verdicts that have outraged many Egyptians.
That exclusion will guarantee Morsi the loyalty of the powerful but hated police force which had abandoned the streets for more than a year after Mubarak's ouster by a popular uprising motivated in large part by the human rights violations of the police and the notorious security services.
Morsi on Thursday also fired the country's top prosecutor, Abdel-Maguid Mahmoud, who has been in the job since 2006. A Mubarak-era appointee, Mahmoud has faced widespread accusations that his office did a shoddy job collecting evidence against Mubarak, el-Adly and the police commanders.
Morsi first fired Mahmoud in October but had to rescind his decision when he found that the powers of his office do not empower him to do so. So on Thursday, he decreed that the prosecutor general could serve in office only for four years, with immediate effect. Morsi replaced Mahmoud with Talaat Abdullah, a career judge.
Shortly before Morsi's decisions were announced, hundreds of Morsi supporters gathered outside Mahmoud's office chanting slogans against him and demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."
Thursday's decisions were read on state television by Morsi's spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian Mubarak and his predecessor Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs. The introductions of the decrees declared that they were designed to "protect" the revolution and dismantle the old regime, a nod to the revolutionaries who have long complained that not enough was being done to reform the country after Mubarak's 29-year rule.
Morsi narrowly won the presidency -- about 52 percent of the vote -- to become Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, ending nearly six decades of de facto military rule.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/22/egypt-president-morsi-grants-himself-far-reaching-powers/#ixzz2CzNhgzSr
Egypt's president on Thursday issued constitutional amendments that placed him above judicial oversight and ordered the retrial of Hosni Mubarak for the killing of protesters in last year's uprising.
Mohammed Morsi also decreed immunity for the Islamist-dominated panel drafting a new constitution from any possible court decisions to dissolve it, a threat that had been hanging over the controversial assembly.
Liberal and Christian members withdrew from the assembly during the past week to protest what they say is the hijacking of the process by Morsi's allies, who they saw are trying to push through a document that will have an Islamist slant marginalizing women and minority Christians and infringing on personal liberties. Several courts have been looking into cases demanding the dissolution of the panel.
The Egyptian leader also decreed that all decisions he has made since taking office in June and until a new constitution is adopted and a new parliament is elected -- which is not expected before next spring -- are not subject to appeal in court or by any other authority. He also barred any court from dissolving the Islamist-led upper house of parliament, a largely toothless body that has also faced court cases.
The moves effectively remove any oversight on Morsi, the longtime Muslim Brotherhood figure who became Egypt's first freely elected president last summer after the Feb. 11, 2011 fall of autocrat Hosni Mubarak. They come as Morsi is riding high on lavish praise from President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton for mediating an end to eight days of fighting between Israel and Gaza's Hamas rulers.
Morsi not only holds executive power, he also has legislative authority after a previous court ruling just before he took office on June 30 dissolved the powerful lower house of parliament, which was led by the Brotherhood. With two branches of power in his hands, Morsi has had repeated frictions with the third, the judiciary, over recent months.
"Morsi today usurped all state powers & appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh," pro-reform leader Mohamed ElBaradei wrote on his Twitter account. "A major blow to the revolution that could have dire consequences."
The president made most of the changes Thursday by issuing a declaration amending what has become a patchwork interim constitution in effect since Mubarak's fall. The military, which took power after Mubarak, set the precedent for the executive unilaterally issuing constitutional changes, which it did several times during its 16-month rule.
Morsi on Thursday extended by two months the deadline for the assembly to produce a draft for a new constitution, apparently to give members more time to iron out their differences.
The moves are likely to fuel growing public criticism that Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood have monopolized power while doing little to tackle the country's endemic woes. Thousands of demonstrators gathered in downtown Cairo for the fourth day running to protest against Morsi's policies and criticize the Muslim Brotherhood, the fundamentalist group from which the Egyptian leader hails.
The decree for a retrial of Mubarak appeared aimed at making a gesture to the public. The decree called for "new investigations and trials" against those who held "political or executive" positions in the old regime and who are accused of killing protesters.
Mubarak was convicted in June to life in prison for failing to stop the killing of protesters during last year's uprising against his rule, but many Egyptians were angered that he wasn't convicted of actually ordering the crackdown and that his security chief, Habib el-Adly, was not sentenced to death. Several top police commanders were acquitted, and Mubarak and his sons were found not guilty of corruption charges.
But the decree would not mean retrials for the dozens of lower-level police officers who have been acquitted or received suspended sentences in trials for killing protesters -- verdicts that have outraged many Egyptians.
That exclusion will guarantee Morsi the loyalty of the powerful but hated police force which had abandoned the streets for more than a year after Mubarak's ouster by a popular uprising motivated in large part by the human rights violations of the police and the notorious security services.
Morsi on Thursday also fired the country's top prosecutor, Abdel-Maguid Mahmoud, who has been in the job since 2006. A Mubarak-era appointee, Mahmoud has faced widespread accusations that his office did a shoddy job collecting evidence against Mubarak, el-Adly and the police commanders.
Morsi first fired Mahmoud in October but had to rescind his decision when he found that the powers of his office do not empower him to do so. So on Thursday, he decreed that the prosecutor general could serve in office only for four years, with immediate effect. Morsi replaced Mahmoud with Talaat Abdullah, a career judge.
Shortly before Morsi's decisions were announced, hundreds of Morsi supporters gathered outside Mahmoud's office chanting slogans against him and demanding the "cleansing of the judiciary."
Thursday's decisions were read on state television by Morsi's spokesman, Yasser Ali. In a throwback to the days of the authoritarian Mubarak and his predecessor Anwar Sadat and Gamal Abdel-Nasser, the television followed up with a slew of nationalist songs. The introductions of the decrees declared that they were designed to "protect" the revolution and dismantle the old regime, a nod to the revolutionaries who have long complained that not enough was being done to reform the country after Mubarak's 29-year rule.
Morsi narrowly won the presidency -- about 52 percent of the vote -- to become Egypt's first freely elected and civilian president, ending nearly six decades of de facto military rule.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/22/egypt-president-morsi-grants-himself-far-reaching-powers/#ixzz2CzNhgzSr

Associated Press

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/11/22/egypt-president-morsi-grants-himself-far-reaching-powers/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Fog of War?



by Melanie Phillips


Once again, here’s yet more information about the war between Hamas and Israel that unaccountably you may not have come across in today’s UK mainstream media.
  • Peace in our time!
On BBC Radio’s Today programme this morning, I heard a correspondent say that most Israelis were ‘relieved’ by the ceasefire in Gaza. I also heard a news bulletin which said the truce had ‘largely held’ overnight. 'Largely held'? That’s not what they thought in the south of Israel, as they dived for shelter throughout the evening during which between 12 and 20 rockets were fired at them from Gaza. Can you imagine what the BBC would have said had Israel launched just one unprovoked air-strike after the cease-fire deadline! But when it’s the Palestinians breaching the cease-fire, this is airbrushed out of the BBC picture.

Yes, Israeli families are immensely relieved that their children will not now have to go into Gaza in house-to-house battles that would have claimed many of their lives. And of course people are relieved to have some respite from the rockets, however short that may prove to be.

But some 70 per cent of Israelis, according to polling figures, were against the ceasefire -- sorry, according to Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, ‘document of understandings’. They are also now anxious that, with the Hamas having only agreed to stop rocket fire, human bomb attacks will now return to Israel’s buses and cafes. Because one way or another, Israel remains under daily threat from the Palestinians who do indeed target civilians, and even more particularly young Israelis, for mass murder.

Israelis are battle-hardened, stoical and realistic. Most believe that any military action in Gaza, on the ground or not, can only ever gain a period of respite by destroying so much of its terrorist infrastructure that it takes time to rebuild it. Those who were against the cease-fire thought that only through a ground invasion could enough damage be done to that infrastructure at the very least to achieve a reasonable respite.

But now many are deeply uneasy, not merely that this was not achieved and that in a few weeks or months Israel may once again be massing on the Gaza border with the rockets flying, and now with Hamas much stronger and with Israel’s own credibility greatly weakened. Look at what a Palestinian Authority official told Ha’aretz (£) :
‘Hamas has no regrets over the destruction in Gaza. On the contrary, Hamas gets a great deal of economic and political benefit from the terrible destruction because of the large donations that will come from the world and the political image of the organization that stands on the front line against Israel.’

Many Israelis are also aghast and incredulous that, through this ceasefire, Obama has given the Muslim Brotherhood – of which Hamas is its terrorist wing – the task of guaranteeing Israel’s security against not just rocket fire but the smuggling of weapons. Egypt’s President Morsi is not just a Muslim Brother but is also in cahoots with Iran – the principal source of the rockets and ammunition to Gaza, which have been smuggled in through ...Egypt. The fox is now in charge of the hen-coop.

Indeed, it is likely that the Obama administration’s main concern here was not to help secure the safety of Israel but to help bolster its protégé Morsi in Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood in the region – because heaven help us all, the Obama administration regards the Brotherhood (whose goal is the Islamisation of the west) as ‘moderate’ and thus a suitable buffer against the west’s Islamist foes. Go figure. Accordingly, it is reaching out to them at home as well as in the Middle East (but that’s another, no less terrifying, story.) 

In this Spectator article, Douglas Murray points out how the Brotherhood is now spreading its tentacles across the region, with terrifying long-term consequences for the west from this longest game in the world.

True, Morsi is presiding over a country at risk of starvation and is thus unlikely to do anything to jeopardise America’s annual $3 billion aid package to Egypt. But that didn’t stop him turning a blind eye to the weapons being transported from Iran to Gaza through Sinai; nor the jihadis flowing through Sinai to help their brothers in Gaza murder more Israelis. As is the Brotherhood’s hallmark, Morsi is a canny operator who proceeds not in a straight line but by zigzagging to achieve his goals. So he surely reckons he can hang onto his US aid and fool the Americans into believing that he is holding the line against the Hamas. And since the Obama administration will pretend that that is what he is doing, the Brothers will tighten the pincer on Israel, the brave but besieged and now almost totally surrounded chicken in the coop.
  • Blood libel against the most moral army in the world
The most startling fact about Israel’s performance in the eight days’ war in Gaza is the one about which the most egregious lie is being told by western commentators. This is the astoundingly low proportion of Palestinian civilian casualties.

According to the IDF spokesman last evening, 177 Palestinians were killed in Operation Pillar of Defence, of whom 120 were ‘engaged in terrorist activity’.

That total is a tiny number of deaths from 1500 air strikes. It also means 57 civilians were killed along with the 120 terrorists. That is a ratio of more than two terrorists for every civilian killed. When you consider that in Afghanistan the ratio was three civilians for every one combatant killed, and in Iraq it was four civilians for every one combatant killed, you can see just what a staggering feat of precision the Israelis achieved. This is even more astonishing given that the Hamas situated their rockets and ammunitions in the middle of civilian areas.

This precision was acknowledged yesterday by American journalist Anderson Cooper, who was interviewed by Wolf Blitzer of CNN after Cooper arrived in Israel from Gaza. Acknowledging that some people would disagree, Cooper said that it was very clear that the IDF clearly knew exactly what it was targeting. Palestinians knew it, too, he said: some of them would go outside to watch and even photograph the attacks, because they knew they were not either the targets or the object of indiscriminate fire. The bottom line was that the Israelis were making clear efforts to hit only military targets.

And the reason for that was that they were trying as hard as they possibly could to avoid hitting civilians. No other army in the world goes to such lengths to avoid civilian casualties. Yet no other army in the world is accused by western commentators, as is the IDF, of targeting not just civilians but babies and children – or at the very least, exhibiting a total indifference to the fact that their air-strikes are killing them.

Reliable figures for the number of children killed do not yet appear to have been published (and such figures are in any event problematic, since the Palestinians use teenagers for terrorist activities). However, UNICEF (no friend of Israel) says that 22 children were killed in the Israeli air strikes. That’s 22 too many – but it’s still 22 out of 177. Given that more than half of Gaza’s population are children, this again underscores the fact that the Israelis were going to great lengths to avoid hitting them.  Yet western commentators have grotesquely smeared the Israelis as child-killers.

Amongst those who credulously believe what they see and hear reported about Gaza – in the UK on the BBC, Sky and Channel Four News in particular -- this modern blood-libel not surprisingly rouses them to passionate hatred of Israel. The broadcasters have played a particularly appalling role in this because, notwithstanding the tiny number of child casualties relative to the huge number of air-strikes and the preponderance of terrorists on the casualty list, the BBC, Sky and Channel Four News have been dwelling on distressing footage of the children who were killed. They have thus given the entirely false impression that the number of children killed was very large, and that the Israelis are heartless brutes.

Given that from past experience inflammatory media coverage of Israel’s wars produces a leap in Jew-hatred in Britain and physical attacks on Jews, it seems to me that such dishonest coverage is not just a gross abuse of broadcasters’ responsibility but also constitutes indirect incitement to racial hatred. I believe therefore that this should be raised in Parliament as a matter of urgency.
  • Today’s entrant into the Hall of Shame
A propos the above, just look at what Wyre Davies said today on the BBC News website:
‘What has shocked me most over the last eight days - during which I have reported exclusively from Gaza, with BBC colleagues complementing in Israel - is the appallingly high number of children killed and injured.’

‘Appallingly high’. That’s 22 out of 177. He went on:
‘If the events of the last week (and 2006 and 2008-9) are not to be repeated, a lasting ceasefire is paramount and a permanent solution to improving the daily lives of more the one and a half million Gazans must be put into place. 

‘It is a destructive cycle. After previous conflicts, it went something like this: Gaza would be allowed to rebuild its institutions and infrastructure; but, with time, as people became increasingly frustrated with the Israeli blockade, Palestinian militants would fire more and more rockets into Israel; Israel would respond with overwhelming military force, and much of what had been built up was destroyed.’

So for this BBC correspondent, the ‘destructive cycle’ is of course Israel’s fault. The Hamas attacks are caused by ‘frustration with the blockade’. But of course the blockade is only there because of the murderous attacks by Hamas. There is no cycle. There is Hamas aggression and Israeli defence.
And as for this Israeli ‘blockade’ – what blockade? Israel restricts certain goods from coming in, for sure, but only on security grounds; it actually allows in a huge amount of humanitarian supplies as well as goods for trade. It is Egypt which tends to keep its border with Gaza sealed; yet mysteriously the Hamas isn’t firing rockets at Cairo.

Duh! Why are such BBC journalists incapable of seeing that what they write about Israel makes so little sense? And such reporting can have lethal consequences.
  • The collusion by the west in Hamas aggression
Col Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, has told the Algemeiner

‘There is a very effective anti-Israel propaganda machine and there has been for some time. It’s partly from the Palestinians, partly from other Arab states and many people in the West—from Europe in particular but also the United States—see Hamas as the underdog and Israel as the bully and their natural inclination is to side with the underdog; but it’s to misunderstand the reality: Hamas is not a small group of lone freedom fighters. Hamas is a terrorist organization supported, financed and directed by Iran. Israel on the other hand is not a bully. It has shown amazing restraint—far more restraint than most other countries would show in the face of this sort of provocation.

‘I think some of the governments, diplomats and international NGOs now circling around this issue should shoulder some of the blame for this current conflict. They ignored year after year terrorist missile attacks and they’ve not made any effort to restrain Hamas. So yes, there’s certainly a culpability far wider than just in the immediate region.’

Absolutely.

Melanie Phillips

Source: http://www.melaniephillips.com/more-real-news-again

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Gaza Withdrawal’s Lesson?



by Jonathan S. Tobin


Like the Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens and our own Max Boot, I, too, have been thinking a lot lately about the seven-year-old debate about whether Israel was wise to withdraw from Gaza. Both Bret and Max are of course right when they say that, looking back on it now, it is clear that the decision was a colossal blunder. Despite the assurances of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and many of the country’s military leaders, Israel’s security was compromised by the decision. It led directly to the creation of a Hamas terror state whose existence may not ever be undone. Just as troubling, Israel did not receive one bit of credit from the international community, let alone its foes, for removing every soldier and settler from the area. Bret summed it up nicely when he wrote:
Put simply, Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza yielded less security, greater diplomatic isolation, and a Palestinian regime even more radical and emboldened than it had been before. As strategic failures go, it was nearly perfect.
But unlike Bret and Max, I don’t feel obligated to offer any mea culpas about my position on the withdrawal. While I supported the move, it was not because I didn’t have doubts about whether the army was right about it being easier to fight Hamas outside Gaza rather than inside it. Nor was I under any illusions about Israel reaping any public relations benefits from the scheme. To the contrary, I was quite sure that, as was the case with previous territorial surrenders, it would merely increase the appetite of Israel’s enemies for more. So why didn’t those reservations compel me to take a stand against Sharon? It was because the decision to withdraw was the decision of the democratically elected government of the state of Israel. Indeed, I believe the defense of that principle — that Israel’s people must be accorded the right to make their own decisions about their fate — is a far more important duty for us today than the need to second-guess the decision of a leader and a government that has long since faded from the country’s political scene.


Opponents of the withdrawal have, understandably, never stopped reminding those of us who backed Ariel Sharon’s decision that it turned out to be every bit the fiasco they thought it would be and more. The talking points Israel gained by pulling out of Gaza provide more proof that the Palestinians haven’t any interest in peace, but it’s doubtful this changed the mind of a single critic of the country. But those Diaspora kibitzers who are now saying, “I told you so,” are still missing the key point about that debate.

It may be that Israel’s prime minister was dead wrong (counter-factual arguments that history would have been different had Sharon not been felled by a stroke months after the withdrawal are unpersuasive) and the majority of Israelis who backed him were equally mistaken. But, right or wrong, it was their decision to make and the Israelis are the ones who have had to live with the consequences.

Looking ahead to the next round of peace processing and pressure on Israel after the current fighting in Gaza is concluded, what friends of Israel have to keep in mind is not so much the rehashing of Sharon’s blunder but preserving the right of the Jewish state to go on deciding its own destiny.

The conceit of most of the country’s left-wing critics is that Israel must be saved from itself. The fact is that the overwhelming majority of Israelis have drawn the proper conclusions from the last 20 years of peace processing (including the Gaza withdrawal) and decided that there will be no more repetitions of the mistakes committed at Oslo or Gaza. This sensible decision frustrates Israel’s critics so much that even those who consider themselves friends of the country believe their judgment should supersede that of the Jewish state’s electorate.

But just as was the case of those Americans who opposed the Gaza withdrawal or the Oslo Accords, such a stand is simply inadmissible. Decisions about settlements, borders, Jerusalem and the territories must be made by those elected by the Israeli people, not by American Jewish wiseacres, be they of the left- or the right-wing persuasion.

No matter how strong the faith of Zion’s critics that the country is heading down the road to destruction, nothing should shake us in our conviction that no foreign power or foreign community has the right to dictate to Israel’s people. That is a principle that applies whether it is a matter of Israelis mistakenly making concessions that have come back to haunt them or, as is the case now, wisely refusing to take steps that would endanger their security.

Seven years after the Gaza withdrawal, it is useful to examine the mistakes that were made by Sharon. But the abiding lesson of that episode for us today is that, right or wrong, Israel must be allowed to make its own decisions.

Jonathan S. Tobin

Source: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/11/21/gaza-lesson-preserve-israeli-self-determination-ariel-sharon/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Liberal Anti-Semitic Projection Syndrome



by Carolyn Glick


I've been on the road for the past several days and out of the loop so to speak. I just got home last night.

I read a blog post by Jonathan Tobin from Commentary today where I discovered that the post-Zionist poster boy of the American Jewish left Peter Beinart is now accusing Israel's non-Jewish supporters of being anti-Semites. 
Beinart you see, thinks that an anti-Semite is someone who criticizes anti-Zionist (or post-Zionist, or fair-weathered Zionist) American Jews for hanging Israel out to dry. 
So if a non-Jew criticizes, say Peter Beinart for spewing nonsense about how Israel's rejection of Beinart's positions on territorial surrender legitimizes anti-Israel sentiment, then that person is an anti-Semite. 
Beinart, after all, criticizes Israel as a Jew so since he does it as a Jew, attacking him for making ridiculous accusations against Israel makes you an anti-Semite. 

There is a wider context for Beinart's position. Beinart has closely associated himself with J Street the pro-Palestinian lobbying group run by American Jews. During the last election cycle, J-Street targeted Israel's staunchest supporters in Congress for defeat. Specifically it targeted Joe Walsh and Allen West, (both ran in gerrymandered districts), because they refused to support the establishment of another Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, (to the side of the Palestinian state in Gaza which the Left likes to pretend doesn't exist). 
J-Street claimed that West and Walsh -- among Israel's firmest supporters on the Hill -- were anti-Israel because they rejected the establishment of another Palestinian terror state in the historic and strategic heartland of the Jewish state.
Beinart's attacks on Rupert Murdoch and others who criticize Jews who attack Israel have to be seen as a continuation of the J Street campaign against Israel's supporters in Washington. 
Jonathan provided the following quote from Beinart's assault on Murdoch:
I don't think anti-Semitism is widespread on the American right, any more than it is widespread on the American left. But when expressed, it should be publicly condemned. Whether it masks itself as hostility to Israel or support for Israel should make no difference at all.

You see what he is doing here. 
He is saying that there is no difference between those who support Israel and decry its critics and those who oppose Israel and decry its supporters. 
This post-modern moral equivalence is absolutely necessary. If you want to make a completely false argument sound reasonable, the first thing you have to do is erase all distinction between good and evil. (See the film clips in my last blog post.)
We need to be aware of what Beinart and his allies are doing. In the coming months and years, we should expect more and more of Israel's supporters to be attacked as anti-Semites by leftist American Jews. The intention of people like Beinart and J Street is to demonize and discredit Israel's supporters just as Israel itself is being demonized and discredited. 
In the face of this new initiative it is imperative that we continue to point out the real distinctions.
And just by way of example, here is Glenn Beck's recent message to the people of Israel. Remember, Beck was repeatedly and viciously targeted by leftist American Jews who called him a racist for pointing out that George Soros admitted to collaborating with the Nazis during the Holocaust.
G-d bless Glenn Beck



Carolyn Glick

Source: http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2012/11/the-liberal-anti-semitic-proje.php

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Share It