Wednesday, February 13, 2008
February 13, 2008 -- Bush's strangest Syrian bedfellow: At center of suspicion in Hezbollah leader's car bombing.... America's "Most Wanted" Imad F. Mugniyeh.
The head of Syrian military intelligence, Assef Shawkat, is no stranger to working with the CIA. Syria has, since 9/11, served as a host for the torture of "extraordinarily renditioned" prisoners captured by the CIA. Shawkat has been at the center of the CIA's program.
WMR has learned from reliable sources that the car bombing in Damascus of Hezbollah military commander Imad Mugniyah on February 12 was carried out by Shawkat with the active encouragement and support of Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, CIA, OSP and Israel's Mossad. WMR has reported in the past that Abrams is the coordinator within the Bush White House of political assassinations, particularly those in the Middle East, and specifically, similar car bombing assassinations in Lebanon. WMR has also previously reported that many of the car bombings in Lebanon were the result of coordination between Israeli, American, and Syrian operatives, including "rogue" Syrians and Lebanese agents in the employ of Assef Shawkat.
Mugniyah was wanted by the United States and Israel for a number of terrorist attacks in the 1980s and 1990s, including the 1983 bombings of the US Embassy and Marine Barracks in Beirut, the 1985 hijacking of an Athens-to-Rome TWA flight in which Navy diver Robert Stethem was murdered, and the kidnapping and murder of Beirut CIA station chief William F. Buckley in 1984 and Marine Corps Lt. Col. William Higgins in 1988.
Significantly, the Israeli Prime Minister's office has denied any role in Imad Fayez Mugniyeh's assassination. However, Israeli government and intelligence officials are happy that it occurred.
Mugniyah's car exploded at around 10:30 pm in the up-market Tantheem Kafer Souseh neighborhood of Damascus. WMR has learned that the car bombing of Mugniyah was to be timed with the February 9th birthday of President Ronald Reagan, a gesture by Shawkat to the Americans, but the specially designed Mitsubishi seats containing the bombs were installed, or "activated..." later... due to "Political calculations... ", linked to the Intelligence "aims" sought....and security Concerns..., resulting in the February 12th assassination, a timing quite reminiscent for Assef Shawkat and his brutal "Henchmen".... [ Assef's last "promotion" dates to February 13th 2005...]
The "ultimate Promotion" for Assef Shawkat's LONG Murder career ... is around the
In the Middle East, dates, particularly anniversaries, carry much weight. The assassination of the popular Christian Leader, Lebanese Member of Parliament, and ex-Minister in several Hariri Governments, Mr. Elie Hobeika on January 24th 2002, coincided with the birthday of Elliott Abrams..., the then-National Security Council Middle East director. Hobeika's car bombing assassination in Beirut was also carried out by Shawkat's operatives, according to WMR's Middle East sources. The Hobeika assassination was the first in a series carried out by the CIA and Mossad with the assistance of Shawkat's intelligence operatives in Lebanon.
Shawkat, by delivering the goods on the assassination of America's "Most Wanted" Imad F. Mugniyeh, has ensured that he will now receive the protection of the Bush White House in the current UN investigation of car bombings in Lebanon, most notably that of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.
Now, the 241 Marines, William F. Buckley, Colonel Higgins, Robert Stethem, the 63 Murdered at the US Embassy in 83, and many others,
can rest in Peace.... 25 years later.....
Sanctions on Businessman Target Syria's Inner Sanctum...LOL
is a load of bullshit, made at Langley's CIA, to cover its tracks and its
Solid association with Syria's KILLER ASSEF SHAWKAT and his Murder
Enterprise,which is a Joint Venture with the White House's Murder Inc....signed on Feb. 13th, which expanded sanctions on Syria is a pathological lie, made by
The move freezes any assets Makhlouf holds in the United States and restricts
his transactions through U.S. financial institutions. The impact, however,
may be largely political and psychological, as he is unlikely to have
identifiable U.S. holdings, experts said.
The action was taken under a presidential executive order, signed on Feb.
13, which expanded sanctions on Syria -- covering support for activities
related to terrorism, narcotics and intervention in Lebanon -- to include
Here's a "taste" of what's to come for Lebanon.....
Annapolis will represent another signpost in the US drive to solidify the de facto unholy alliance that has bound Israel and the so-called "moderate" Arab states under US patronage. In this case, it is difficult to be optimistic about prospects for Lebanon or the region....
For Lebanon the US project means eliminating Hizbullah's core "Resistance" capabilities..., one way or the other, so as to remove Israel's only genuine security threat and deprive Syria and Iran of leverage in their own negotiations with the US regarding the Golan Heights and nuclear arms respectively....
However, in light of the failure of the July 2006 US-Israeli war to destroy Hezbollah, the US has for now shifted its strategy away from a military solution to co-opting the Lebanese state, its cronies, stooges and creeps of Elliott Abrams, itself to pursue these tasks on its behalf-much as it has done in Palestine with Abu Mazen's recent declaration of war against Hamas....
By recognizing March 14's disputed claims to executive authority (now apparently reinforced with the governments' assumption of presidential powers), encouraging it to reject the opposition's repeated calls for a national unity government, and supporting its call for the full implementation of UNSC resolution 1559, the US appears to believe it has accomplished the first stage of this strategy which has focused on removing the Resistance's official cloak of state legitimacy it enjoyed under President CIA Lahoud....
The second phase of US strategy is to create what the Pentagon calls a "strategic alliance" with the Lebanese army--the only state institution that enjoys broad support from all Lebanese communities, regardless of sect or class-- by transforming it into a force that would confront, rather than support, the Resistance. US military aid has been rising exponentially, as has the EU's; while March 14 has
been working hard to install officers loyal to its cause in a bid to reverse the army's pro-Resistance sympathies...., and the "White House Murder Inc.", was busy... Murdering those who are not "compliant"...[like HK, Elie Hobeika, who categorically refused to Play Ball with their criminal Tactics..., despite the Carrots and the Heavy, Ugly, despicable, deceitful "sticks"... of CIA..., and paid the Ultimate
Price for his correct and courageous stands], as was the case, with the despicable assassination of General Francois El-Hajj ....and many More..., by the exact same "Template"..., a rogue criminal Enterprise, The White House's Murder INC.
After seven years of ignoring the plight of the Palestinians and often actively undermining the “Road Map” and other such peace agreements, the Bush administration decided to convene Annapolis at a time when the American, Israeli, and Palestinian leaderships were in their weakest political positions; hardly a recipe for success, unless, we look at things from a different angle.
The Palestinian leadership, considered illegitimate by a large portion of Palestinians, when looked at from this new angle, barely makes it into the picture as the disposable policy conduit of the heavy weights, the U.S. and Israel.
The only way we can understand and explain Annapolis is through the consistent behavior of both the U.S. and Israel over the last years; through their methods of operation - that would hardly change overnight - and not through their words or photo ops. We need to look for similarities in their policies and approaches and to consider where they would be implemented next and how Annapolis would facilitate that.
Fighting terrorism and outside threats is at the core of both American and Israeli domestic and foreign policies and their sustainability depends on such threats. Recently, even though such threats have not diminished, the populations all over the world have adjusted to their levels as in the case of Al-Qaeda, or outright rejected them as insignificant regional threats as in the case of the violence between Israelis and Palestinians, even worse for Israel, more and more the violence is perceived as disproportionately one sided and a direct result of the occupation of Palestinian lands and Israeli intransigence.
For the U.S. and Israel to preserve their policies and strategic objectives, the threat level has to evolve and increase beyond what it is today.
The grounds are being prepped for such an increase and Annapolis is but a “signpost”, it is so correctly cautioned. The U.S. and Israel are actively engaged, through the use of military force, economic pressure, financial incentives, political arm-twisting, etc…, in creating and widening rifts between countries and within populations in the Middle East in order to transform an entire region stretching from Pakistan to Algeria.
By the day, the rifts are expanding in Lebanon, Iraq, and Palestine, and it is no secret that the U.S. is going to implement the so-called successes of the Anbar province of Iraq, paying a segment of the population for forcibly policing another, in the volatile Tribal Regions of Pakistan. We also know of clandestine operations in Iran to undermine the Iranian government through discontented minorities. Such clandestine operation could also be taking place elsewhere.
The large and enduring threat that the U.S. and Israel are looking for can be described as a contiguous swath of land where the so-called radical Muslims roam unchecked. The relationships between populations and countries that compose it is of no consequence as long as, to the average western observer, the region resembles an incomprehensible and menacing brew, a sort of an active volcano, impossible to control or predict, that could spew its terrorism lava at any moment and only the vigilant eye of the U.S. and its allies could protect the world.
“with us or against us” will be redefined and re-imposed. Even though the question is the same as after 9/11, the scope is different. After 9/11, it was imposed on countries, now, it will be imposed on individuals in the greater Middle East region; it will be the question that defines the fault line of a rift.
Annapolis is the forum where the new “with us or against us” was formally proposed and the Palestinian issue will be split in half along the fault line it creates. There will be moderate Palestinians who are “with us”, and radicals “against us”; the Palestinian issue would be solved by simply having it vanish.
Annapolis is where Israel is given the cover to pursue two diametrically opposed policies. One that would reward a so-called moderate (compliant) West Bank with some form of peace while the other would punish Gaza with the harshest of treatments to make certain that Gaza is forced into the “against us” camp.
The so-called moderate Arab states would use the treatment of the West Bank as the fig leaf they so desperately need to relieve them from the burdensome Palestinian issue. They might even help rehabilitate Israel, normalize relationships, or even form an alliance if Israel is made to be perceived as the only regional power that could counter-balance a menacing nuclear Iran.
In contrast, the treatment of Gaza, which is mostly Muslim, would be a stronger rallying cry for the radicals and would surely increase their fervor and numbers.
Both sides of the rift, the “with us” and “against us”, would have their supporting arguments but they are no longer countries, they are now individuals. The net effect of this policy toward the Palestinian issue would be the polarization of Arab and Muslim societies down to the smallest of social units; the rift will be within families, even between couples.
Still, this is not sufficient for the U.S. and Israel since these individuals are too dispersed. If we were to think of this new policy toward Palestine as the driving force behind this rift, the critical mass where all the ingredients are present, the powder keg that would make it happen is Pakistan and no one other than bin Laden is holding the match.
In his recent audio, released through Al-Jazeera, bin Laden hinted at the illegality of the War in Afghanistan but supplied no credible evidence. His attempt at driving a wedge between Europe and the U.S. could only be described as amateurish and his allegations dismissed as bogus.
As someone who has researched and written extensively on the legality of the Afghanistan war, I can assure you that bin Laden’s allegations are no joke. The Afghanistan war was illegal beyond the Iraq war; the victims of the Afghanistan war are not only the innocent civilians, but also every soldier who has died, and even you and I.
It is reported that bin Laden’s recent release targeted Europe’s population. The truth is, it targeted U.S. and European leaderships since they are the only ones who knew what he was talking about.
The proper evidence will be supplied by bin Laden sooner or later since the West would never dare supply it. It will surface when it benefits him the most. The most likely time would be, since it also fits the often observed symbiotic relationship between him and Bush, shortly after Musharraf, the Pakistani president, launches the long awaited military campaign against the Tribal Regions with the help of U.S. military advisers.
Should we wait for bin Laden to light the fuse when it benefits him and those imposing the “with us or against us” option, or, should I inform you now in the hope that you could resurrect the good options?
Since I have written about this crime extensively, and fulfilled my duty by informing the Democratic Judiciary Committees in both U.S. House and Senate, I see no reason why you should not have known about it even sooner.
What bin Laden said is true; the evidence that Al-Qaeda bore the sole responsibility for 9/11 was obtained by the U.S., through human intelligence, on September 26, 2001, ten days before the invasion of Afghanistan.
The tape released by the Pentagon on December 13, 2001, showing bin Laden confessing to Khaled Al-Harbi of his involvement in the attacks was the result of a sting operation run by U.S. intelligence with the help of Saudi intelligence on September 26, 2001.
Intelligence operatives had four days advance notice of the date of the meeting and taping, twenty four hours advance notice of its location, and knew that bin Laden would be in that village for at least three hours if not overnight since his family also lived in that village.
Instead of killing him or capturing him as per Bush’s famous promise “dead or alive”, this perfectly scripted opportunity was used to tape him. If bin Laden was killed or captured on that date, the U.S. would not have had any international support or legal standing to invade Afghanistan ten days later.
Based on actions by NATO, and statements by high-ranking Pakistani officials in the beginning of October 2001, the evidence seems to have been shared with them because of their importance in the war effort, but, such evidence of bin Laden’s guilt was not shared with the Taliban even though they offered bin Laden in exchange.
The U.S. had the military clout and, so shortly after 9/11, the strong international support that would have forced the Taliban to hand over bin Laden and avert war if evidence of his guilt was provided. This is also the path dictated by the Geneva Convention and the UN Charter. The U.S. chose to conceal the evidence and go ahead with the invasion; that is what bin Laden means by “the U.S. insisted”.
The release of such information by bin Laden, coupled with verses from the Koran, Hadeeth, or Muslim history relating to acts of treason against Islam or the Prophet, augmented by announcement of the capture of a Saudi intelligence cell inside Al-Qaeda assigned to kill him, would surely inflame sentiments in Pakistan and elsewhere against Musharraf and his patrons, the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.
The rift could only get wider and would stretch from Pakistan to Gaza on the Mediterranean and maybe even Algeria and Morocco on the Atlantic; now that is big enough. Iran, caught in the middle would be further isolated and cut off from an important energy client, India. The U.S. would re-deploy to the safety of the Kurdish area in Iraq and meddle at its leisure while the rest of Iraq plunges into a civil war. The Iraqi Sunnis would rely on the U.S. for military support, and Saudi Arabia for financial support and volunteers. Iran would be sucked deeper into the conflict.
This last option, “with us or against us”, put on the table in Annapolis is a lose-lose proposition; it is an ugly choice between sides of a rift at the expense, and thereby demise, of all the good options that reflect peoples’ aspirations, interests, visions, and true potential....
A 'great national leader,' ...? for the A Team....of Resistance.
You only have yourselves to Blame.... CIA/MOSSAD.
The West that would allow such a public accolade be paid to a
butcher like Ariel Sharon in the first place, and calls him a
"Man of Peace", should not be surprised, "If Mughniyeh may
so-easily be described in some World media as a
'great national leader,' ...
Then how do we describe the likes of MOSSAD, SS commander
Meir DAGAN, Assef Shawkat and his henchmen, any of the
faceless CIA assassins who operate in today's "New" Cold War,
or any who committed war crimes under Ariel Sharon, Begin,
Barak, BUSH, ASSAD, and others?"
"The only 'greatness' Sharon and BUSH have been accorded,
stems from some quarters in the Western media which are
cowards, ignorant and confused, bought by CIA disinformation
machinations, structured in DC, Langley and Herzliah, with
redundant echoes, bouncing off satellites and fiber-optic cables
The CIA, MOSSAD Alliance, started anew in 1996...,
is a marriage made In HELL, and will bring Havoc to
America's shores and cities.
Let me make some Facts clear ounce and for all,
The ONLY reason why the ASSADS are still in
power in Syria, is because Israel's Government
and Security establishment supports a Alawite
Regime in Syria. Period.
Now, the Assads Regime "might" be showing
some "cracks" from INSIDE it's structure, based
on Family and Billions Stolen, tens of Billions....
since the "advent" of Assef Shawkat....
Assef Shawkat "rammed" through the Assad's
family, like a Bullet Train in the 90s, and married
Bushra.... following the Murder of BASIL
Basil was adamantly opposed to this Monster....
He rose through the ranks....especially since 2002.
He moved way up on Feb. 13th 2005....
In Feb. "13th 2008".... he is making moves for the
KILL against the ASSADS, in order to become the
NEW Dictator of Damascus himself NOW..... because
BASHAR is too "enamored" with Hassan Nasrallah.....
and ASSEF is not...Assef is supported by the USA's
services to the hilt, and they are trying to Help him
make and prepare a winning strategy to replace
BASHAR and the KILLER MAHER Al-ASSAD,
with the "couple" ASSEF / BUSHRA ASSAD....
Israel can live with this Strategy and is supporting
it NOW. ........ !!!
Israel will never support a Strategy of Removing the
Alawites completely, to replace them with a Sunni
dominated Regime, which Chirac and Bush were....
contemplating.... some time ago in 2006.... in fact
BUSH and US services, when push came to shove.....
DID Not support even including Damascus in
the Israeli campaign of 2006, but pushed Chirac
into coming out openly..., asking for it publicly,
and the Israelis said NIET...
Now, there is a Coup D'état being "primed" in
Damascus.... the timing remains a Mystery...?
But you can be sure that Assef Shawkat
will be the winner, should he be able to Pull it off....
with the HELP OF ......????
The Lebanese can only watch, and should never
get embroiled in such a DOG's fight....
Lebanon can't remedy that, but it can
avoid tactless behavior that worsens
One key fact to remember. In addition to acting as a
"lily pad" from which the US and NATO can project
power into Syria, Iraq, and beyond... we are meddling
into muddy waters already... as is the case in .........
Hezbollah: The Deadly Cell Phone Ping? LOL
[ Stratfor is Disinformation for CIA, Texas funded and Texas
In the wake of the Feb. 12 assassination of top Hezbollah commander Imad
Mughniyah, the organization has instructed its operatives to exercise
caution when using cell phones to avoid becoming targets of Israeli attacks.
Due to advancements in electronic surveillance, however, Hezbollah will have
to do a lot more to evade the deadly cell phone ping.
Fresh Analysis.... For CIA/MOSSAD, SS.
Hezbollah has plenty of reasons to be paranoid in the wake of the Feb. 12
assassination of top commander Imad Mughniyah. Not only does Israel possibly
have more targeted assassinations in store, but Hezbollah cannot be sure of
the origin of the leak that sacrificed its most seasoned and innovative
There are indications that Hezbollah suspects the leak came from Syrian
intelligence. When Hezbollah officials like Mughniyah travel to Damascus,
they inform the Syrian authorities just before they cross the border into
Syria. Once they are inside the country, Syrian intelligence vehicles escort
them to their destination. This is to say that the Syrian regime
necessarily was complicit in the attack, you can be sure that Assef Shawkat
did it--even if, Hezbollah remains a key asset for Damascus - but there is a
possibility that a foreign intelligence agency such as the Israeli Mossad
recruited an asset within the Syrian intelligence network. This could
explain why Syria has maintained a highly defensive posture following the
assassination, making almost daily announcements about the progress of the
bombing investigation and indirectly blaming Israel and Western-backed Arab
governments in the region....Let me make some Facts clear ounce and for all,
The ONLY reason why the ASSADS are still in power in Syria, is because
Israel's Government and Security establishment supports a Alawite Regime in
Syria. Period. Now, the Assads Regime "might" be showing some "cracks" from
INSIDE it's structure, based on Family and Billions Stolen, tens of
Billions.... since the "advent" of Assef Shawkat....
Assef Shawkat "rammed" through the Assad's family, like a Bullet Train in
the 90s, and married Bushra.... following the Murder of BASIL al-Assad?
Basil was adamantly opposed to this Monster....He rose through the
ranks....especially since 2002. He moved way up on Feb. 13th 2005....
In Feb. "13th 2008".... he is making moves for the KILL against the ASSADS,
in order to become the NEW Dictator of Damascus himself NOW..... because
BASHAR is too "enamored" with Hassan Nasrallah.....and ASSEF is not...Assef
is supported by the USA's services to the hilt, and they are trying to Help
him make and prepare a winning strategy to replace BASHAR and the KILLER
MAHER Al-ASSAD, with the "couple" ASSEF / BUSHRA ASSAD....
Israel can live with this Strategy and is supporting it NOW. ........ may be
!!! Israel will never support a Strategy of Removing the Alawites
completely, to replace them with a Sunni dominated Regime, which Chirac and
Bush were....contemplating.... some time ago in 2006.... in fact BUSH and US
services, when push came to shove.....DID Not support even including
Damascus in the Israeli campaign of 2006, but pushed Chirac into coming out
openly..., asking for it publicly, and the Israelis said NIET...Now, there
is a Coup D'état being "primed" in Damascus.... the timing remains a
Mystery...? But you can be sure that Assef Shawkat will be the winner,
should he be able to Pull it off.... with the HELP OF ......???? The
Lebanese can only watch, and should never get embroiled in such a DOG's
fight....Lebanon can't remedy that, but it can avoid tactless behavior that
worsens the situation.... One key fact to remember. In addition to acting as
a "lily pad" from which the US and NATO can project power into Syria, Iraq,
and beyond... we are meddling into muddy waters already... as is the case in
.........SCS....! Change in Syria will benefit Lebanon that much..., it's
not the possibility of a Sunni fundamentalist takeover that we should be
concerned with in my opinion, this is a scarecrow that the Assad regime has
propped up to justify its existence to the west, the problem is that Syria
wields too much power over Lebanon with the acquiescence of a lot of
Lebanese, no one in Syria is crazy enough to give that up. If Assad falls
his replacement may not be as brutal but it's difficult to imagine less
interference in Lebanese affairs...Then, for all intents and purposes, our
Problem is mainly an Internal Lebanese/Lebanese Problem .... which should be
addressed by "adult" Politicians asap, even if we have to TOSS all the old
ones out for good, and start anew....
Following the assassination, Hezbollah has severely tightened security in
Lebanon and temporarily curtailed the travel of any key officials to Syria.
Stratfor has learned that the Hezbollah leadership also has instructed its
cadres to be extremely vigilant in their movements and use of mobile phones.
Hezbollah operatives are under strict orders not to answer phone calls from
unknown callers. Instead, the operatives must first change locations and
then return the calls if necessary.
The reason for these instructions is the relative ease with which a hostile
intelligence agency can triangulate a target's location by exploiting the
structure of GSM networks. Using either mobile identification or
multilaterization, the location of the target phone can be determined within
the network. Of these two methods, multilaterization (more commonly known as
phone pinging) is more precise, yielding accuracies within five meters of
the location of the phone. Hezbollah is operating on the logic that when a
call is received, a hard connection is made with the tower and the target's
location immediately can be pinpointed. However, if the target first moves
to a different location before returning the call (preferably in an area
with fewer network contact points, towers and receivers to enlarge the
target scope), the mobile user likely will be harder to locate and will be
exposed to less risk.
Mobile phone networks are not particularly useful for tracking moving
targets on the street, unless the phones being used have GPS modules.
However, this tactic still can help pinpoint facilities or verify that a
target is at a particular location (such as the building where Mughniyah
allegedly held a meeting with Hamas and Syrian intelligence officials) prior
to the launch of a planned attack.
This exploitation of phones also can be applied to those that rely on
satellite networks. A case in point is the April 1996 assassination of
Dzhokhar Musayevich Dudayev, the first president of Chechnya, in the heyday
of the first Chechen war. Rumor has it that Dudayev was compromised by
then-colleague Vladislav Surkov (who now is Russian President Vladimir Putin's
deputy chief of staff) before the latter switched sides and allied with the
Kremlin. Through Surkov, the Russian security establishment obtained Dudayev's
personal phone numbers and triangulated his precise location while he was
using his satellite phone in southern Chechnya; Russian forces later dropped
a 500-pound bomb on the safe house where he was hiding.
Given that the instructions for cell phone use were given to Hezbollah
operatives in the immediate aftermath of the Mughniyah assassination, there
is a distinct possibility that a simple cell phone ping is what gave away
Mughniyah's location. That said, Mughniyah was obsessed with operational
security and likely was well aware of the risks involved in using a cell
phone. Nicknamed "the Fox," Mughniyah probably was not one to fall for such
High-value targets like Mughniyah usually [don't carry any cell phones,
ever, and Stratfor is Disinformation for CIA, Texas funded and Texas based,]
to avoid being traced. There is always the possibility that a compromised
Syrian intelligence officer fitted Mughniyah's phone with a SIM card for the
attackers to trace, but it would have been far easier for the source simply
to inform the perpetrators of the time and location of Mughniyah's meeting.
There is also the distinct possibility that software was installed on his
cell phone to facilitate targeting his location. This could have been done
by someone with access to his phone or, given the right resources, it could
have been installed on the phone remotely from another phone or a computer
without his knowledge. Once the software is installed, it can calculate the
user's location within the network and send this information to a preset
place, either via e-mail or using SMS. However, this is dependent on the
surveillant knowing the phone number for the SIM card, as well as the phone
or SIM card having enough memory available to copy the program.
Moreover, seasoned operatives like Mughniyah often are familiar with the
U.S. government's cell phone tracking abilities, in addition to the practice
of using multilaterization and network exploitation to pinpoint a target's
location. These methods utilize the signals used by networks and phones to
communicate and exchange data when they are connected. Phones often receive
redundant signals while connected, which ensures that continuous
communication can occur even while the user is moving considerable
distances. The strength of the signals varies with the distance between the
device and the tower or communication point, allowing a phone to be located
within a particular network. By calculating either the strength of the tower
signals being received by the phone or the time it takes them to reach the
device, the phone's location can be triangulated. The owner of the phone
does not even need to be using it for this to take place, but it must be
connected to the network. The most effective way to beat this system,
therefore, is to remove either the battery or the SIM card - or both - from
the phone when it is not in use.
The FBI also has earned the U.S. government several lawsuits by turning
criminals' cell phones into microphones and transmitters for eavesdropping.
This process, known as using a roving bug, can be carried out by getting the
mobile provider to remotely install a piece of software on a handset without
the owner's knowledge that activates the microphone - even if the target is
not on a call.
The instructions given to Hezbollah operatives on cell phone use thus
reflect a high degree of naiveté...., High-value targets like Mughniyah
usually [don't carry any cell phones, ever, and Stratfor is Disinformation
for CIA, Texas funded and Texas based,] on the part of Hezbollah's
leadership. Even the Hamas leaders, who also have gone underground for fear
of Israeli reprisal attacks, have taken far more logical measures to avoid
detection. According to a Feb. 12 Al Hayat report, high-value Hamas targets
are prohibited from using cell phones. A center in Gaza has also been
created to filter landline calls for these leaders, and callers must enter a
pass code before their calls will go through....
Despite the security risks associated with cell phone use, the devices have
become as much of a necessity for militant organizations like Hezbollah as
they have for businessmen. Counterterrorism operations can continue to
benefit from this and further advances in electronic surveillance
technology. Hezbollah operatives, meanwhile, will have to take more
extraordinary measures to avoid having their phone conversations end with a
boom.....High-value targets like Mughniyah usually [don't carry any cell
phones, ever, and Stratfor is Disinformation for CIA, Texas funded and Texas
Congressman Howard Berman on Israel and the pro-Israel lobby:
This Israel firster is replacing Tom Lantos as the chair of House
Committee on Foreign Affairs as I am sure that AIPAC is very happy
Congressman Howard Berman on Israel and the pro-Israel lobby
Such US support of Israel is what got US tragically attacked at the
World Trade Center in 1993 and on 9/11:
Additional about Mearsheimer/Walt at the following URL:
Look what Tom Hayden wrote about Berman and his brother after the
Mearsheimer/Walt paper came out:
Tom Hayden: Things Come 'Round in Mideast:
By Tom Hayden
Editor's note: In this essay, veteran social activist Tom Hayden,
drawing upon his own rude political awakening to the realities of
Israeli and Middle East politics during the 1980s, warns that the
Israel lobby in the U.S. aims to "roll back the clock" and "change the
map" of the region and that its neoconservative supporters will
probably try to use the current Middle East crisis to ignite a larger
war against Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran.
Twenty-five years ago I stared into the eyes of Michael Berman, chief
operative for his congressman-brother, Howard Berman. I was a neophyte
running for the California Assembly in a district that the Bermans
claimed belonged to them.
"I represent the Israeli defense forces," Michael said. I thought he
was joking. He wasn't. Michael seemed to imagine himself the
gatekeeper protecting Los Angeles' Westside for Israel's political
interests, and those of the famous Berman-Waxman machine. Since Jews
represented one-third of the Democratic district's primary voters,
Berman held a balance of power.
All that year I tried to navigate the district's Jewish politics. The
solid historical liberalism of the Westside was a favorable factor, as
was the strong support of many Jewish community leaders. But the
community was moving in a more conservative direction. Some were
infuriated at my sponsorship of Santa Monica's tough rent control
ordinance. Many in the organized community were suspicious of the New
Left for becoming Palestinian sympathizers after the Six Day War; they
would become today's neoconservatives.
I had traveled to Israel in a generally supportive capacity, meeting
officials from all parties, studying energy projects, befriending
peace advocates like the writer Amos Oz. I also met with Palestinians
and commented favorably on the works of Edward Said. As a result, a
Berman ally prepared an anti-Hayden dossier in an attempt to discredit
my candidacy with the Democratic leadership in the California state
This led to the deli lunch with Michael Berman. He and his brother
were privately leaning toward an upcoming young prosecutor named Adam
Schiff, who later became the congressman from Pasadena. But they
calculated that Schiff couldn't win without name recognition, so they
were considering "renting" me the Assembly seat, Berman said. But
there was one condition: that I always be a "good friend of Israel."
This wasn't a particular problem at the time. Since the 1970s I had
favored some sort of two-state solution. I felt close to the local
Jewish activists who descended from the labor movement and
participated in the civil rights and anti-Vietnam movements. I wanted
to take up the cause of the aging Holocaust survivors against the
global insurance companies that had plundered their assets.
While I believed the Palestinians had a right to self-determination, I
didn't share the animus of some on the American left who questioned
Israel's very legitimacy. I was more inclined toward the politics of
Israel's Peace Now and those Palestinian nationalists and human rights
activists who accepted Israel's pre-1967 borders as a reality to
accommodate. I disliked the apocalyptic visions of the Israeli
settlers I had met, and thought that even hard-line Palestinians would
grudgingly accept a genuine peace initiative.
I can offer my real-life experience to the present discussion about
the existence and power of an "Israel lobby." It is not as monolithic
as some argue, but it is far more than just another interest group in
a pluralist political world. In recognizing its diversity,
distinctions must be drawn between voters and elites, between Reform
and Orthodox tendencies, between the less observant and the more
observant. During my ultimate 18 years in office, I received most of
my Jewish support from the ranks of the liberal and less observant
voters. But I also received support from conservative Jews who saw
themselves as excluded by a Jewish (and Democratic) establishment.
However, all these rank-and-file constituencies were attuned to the
question of Israel, even in local and state elections, and would never
vote for a candidate perceived as anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian. I
had to be certified "kosher," not once but over and over again.
The certifiers were the elites, beginning with rabbis and heads of the
multiple mainstream Jewish organizations, especially each city's
Jewish Federation. An important vetting role was held as well by the
American-Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC), a group closely
associated with official parties in Israel. When necessary, Israeli
ambassadors, counsels general and other officials would intervene with
statements declaring someone a "friend of Israel."
In my case, a key to the "friendship issue" was the Los Angeles-based
counsel general Benjamin Navon. Though politics drew us together, our
personal friendship was genuine enough. I think that Benny, as he was
called, wanted to pull me and my then-wife, Jane Fonda, into a pro-
Israel stance, but he himself was an old-school labor/social democrat
who personally believed in a negotiated political settlement. We
enjoyed personal and intellectual time together, and I still keep on
my bookshelf a wooden sculpture by his wife, of an anguished victim of
The de facto Israeli endorsement would be communicated indirectly, in
compliance with laws that prohibit foreign interference in an American
election. We would be seen and photographed together in public. Benny
would make positive public statements that could be quoted in campaign
mailings. As a result, I was being declared "kosher" by the ultimate
source, the region's representative of the state of Israel.
Nevertheless, throughout the spring 1982 campaign I was accused of
being a left-wing madman allied to terrorism and communism. The
national Democratic leader Walter Mondale commented jokingly during a
local visit that I was being described as worse than Lenin. It was a
I won the hard-fought primary by 51% to 45%. The Bermans stayed
neutral. Willie Brown, Richard Alatorre and the rest of the California
Democratic establishment were quietly supportive. I easily won the
general election in November.
But that summer I made the mistake of my political career. The Israel
Defense Forces invaded Lebanon, and Benny Navon wanted Jane and me to
be supportive. It happened that I had visited the contested border in
the past, witnessed the shelling of civilian Israeli homes, and
interviewed Israeli and Lebanese zealots--crazies, I thought, who were
preaching preventive war. I opposed cross-border rocket attacks and
naively favored a demilitarized zone.
Ever curious, and aware of my district's politics, I decided we should
go to the Middle East--but only as long as the Israeli "incursion," as
it was delicately called, was limited to the 10-kilometer space near
the Lebanese border, as a cushion against rocket fire. Benny Navon
assured me that the "incursion" was limited, and would be followed by
negotiations and a solution. I also made clear our opposition to the
use of any fragmentation bombs in the area, and my ultimate political
identification with what Israeli Peace Now would say.
There followed a descent into moral ambiguity and realpolitick that
still haunts me today. When we arrived at the Israeli-Lebanon border,
the game plan promised by Benny Navon had changed utterly. Instead of
a localized border conflict, Israel was invading and occupying all of
Lebanon--with us in tow. Its purpose was to destroy militarily the
Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) haven in Lebanon. This had
been Gen. Ariel Sharon's secret plan all along, and I never will know
with certainty whether Benny Navon had been deceived along with
For the next few weeks, I found myself defending Israel's "right" to
self-defense on its border, only to realize privately how foolish I
was becoming. In the meantime, Israel's invasion was continuing, with
ardent Jewish support in America.
Finally, a close friend and political advisor of mine, Ralph Brave,
took me for a walk, looked into my eyes and said: "Tom, you can't do
this. You have to stop." He was right, and I did. In the California
Legislature, I went to work on Holocaust survivor issues while
withdrawing from the bind of Israeli-Palestinian politics. When the
first Palestinian intifada began, I sensed from experience that the
balance of forces had changed, and that the Israeli occupation was
finished. Frictions developed between me and some of my Israeli and
Jewish friends when I suggested that Israel must make a peace deal
immediately or accept a worse deal later.
It is still painful and embarrassing to describe these events of
nearly 25 years ago, but with Israel today again bombing Lebanon and
Israeli officials bragging about "rolling back the clock by twenty
years" and reconfiguring the Middle East, I feel obliged to speak out
against history repeating.
How do I read today's news through the lens of the past?
What I fear is that the "Israeli lobby" is working overtime to
influence American public opinion on behalf of Israel's military
effort to "roll back the clock" and "change the map" of the region,
going far beyond issues like prisoner exchange.
What I fear is that the progress of the American peace movement
against the Iraq war will be diverted and undermined, at least for
now, by the entry of Israel from the sidelines into the center of the
What I fear is the rehabilitation of the discredited U.S.
neoconservative agenda to ignite a larger war against Hamas,
Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. The neoconservatives' 1996 "Clean Break"
memo advocated that Israel "roll back" Lebanon and destabilize Syria
in addition to overthrowing Saddam Hussein. An intellectual dean of
the neoconservatives, Bernard Lewis, has long advocated the
"Lebanonization" of the Middle East, meaning the disintegration of
nation states into "a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects,
tribes, regions and parties."
This divide-and-conquer strategy, a brainchild of the region's British
colonizers, is already taking effect in Iraq, where America overthrew
a secular state, installed a Shiite majority and its militias in power
and now portrays itself as the only protection for Sunnis against
those same Shiites. The resulting quagmire has become a justification
for American troops to remain.
What I fear is trepidation and confusion among rank-and-file voters
and activists, and the paralysis of politicians, especially Democrats,
who last week were moving gradually toward setting a deadline for U.S.
withdrawal from Iraq. The politics of the present crisis favor the
Republicans and the White House in the short run. How many politicians
will favor withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq under present conditions?
Isn't this Karl Rove's game plan for the November elections?
What I know is that I will not make the same mistake again. I hope
that my story deepens the resolve of all those whose feelings are
torn, conflicted or confused in the present. It is not being a "friend
of Israel" to turn a blind eye to its never-ending occupation.
One might argue, and many Americans today might agree, that Hezbollah
and Hamas started this round of war with their provocative kidnappings
of Israeli soldiers. Lost in the headlines, however, is the fact that
the Israelis have 9,000 Palestinian prisoners, and have negotiated
prisoner swaps before. Others will blame the Islamists for incessant
rocket attacks on Israel. But the roots of this virulent spiral of
vengeance lie in the permanent occupation of Palestinian territories
by the overconfident Israelis. As it did in 1982, Israel now admits
that the war is not about prisoner exchanges or cease-fires; it is
about eradicating Hezbollah and Hamas altogether, if necessary by an
escalation against Syria or even Iran. It should be clear by now that
the present Israeli government will never accept an independent
Palestinian state, but rather harbors a colonial ambition to decide
which Palestinian leaders are acceptable.
In 1982, Israel said the same thing about eliminating PLO sanctuaries
in Lebanon. It was after that 1982 Israeli invasion that Hezbollah was
born. I remember Israeli national security experts even taking credit
for fostering Hamas and Islamic fundamentalism as safe, reclusive
alternatives to Palestinian secular nationalism. I remember watching
Israeli soldiers blow up Palestinian houses and carry out collective
punishment because, they told me matter-of-factly, punishment is the
only language that Arabs understand. Israelis are inflicting
collective punishment on Lebanese civilians for the same reason
It is clear that apocalyptic forces, openly green-lighted by President
Bush, are gambling on the impossible. They are trying to snatch
victory from the jaws of defeat in Iraq through escalation in Lebanon
and beyond. This is yet another faith-based initiative.
If the American people do not see through the headlines; if the
Democrats turn hawkish; if the international community fails to
intervene immediately, the peace movement may be sidelined to a
prophetic and marginal role for the moment. But we can say the
following for now:
Militarism and occupation cannot extinguish the force of Islamic
nationalism. Billions in American tax dollars are funding the Israeli
troops and bombs.
There needs to be an exit strategy. The absence of any such exit plan
is the weakest element of the U.S.-Israeli campaign. Just as the White
House says it plans to deploy 50,000 troops on permanent bases in an
occupied Iraq, so the Israelis speak of permanently eliminating their
enemies, from Gaza to Tehran. The result will be further occupation,
resistance and deeper quagmire.
The immediate conflict should not become a pretext for continuing the
U.S. military occupation of Iraq. American soldiers should not be
stuck waist-deep in a sectarian quagmire. Congressional insistence on
denying funds for permanent military bases is a vital first step.
Otherwise we will witness a tacit alliance between Israel and the U.S.
to dominate the Middle East militarily.
Most important, Americans must not be timid in speaking up, as I was
25 years ago. Silence is consent to occupation....and much much More.