Here is Some Mindsteroid Must-Read: Political parties in the Netherlands reached an agreement on budget cuts on Thursday, just a day after the government coalition collapsed over the issue. Caretaker Prime MinisterMark Rutte and his liberal the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, and coalition party, Christian Democratic Appeal, received enough support from three opposition parties to form a narrow majority giving them enough votes to push through the budget package.
The cuts agreed to on Thursday are expected to bring the country’s budget deficit down from 4.5 percent of GDP to 3 percent, the maximum legal limit according to European rules.
Netherlands Government Latest Victim of European Debt Crisis The agreement was reached in just one day, after seven weeks of budget negotiations with former coalition partner Geert Wilders and his far-right Freedom Party. The government collapsed last Saturday after Wilders walked out of the negotiations.
please follow these links that influenced this video hereinbelow:
Here is Some Mindsteroid Must-Read from Arutz Sheva
Approximately one year after the assassination of Osama bin Laden, a memo written by former CIA DirectorLeon Panetta has been obtained, revealing that President Obama was not, in fact, in charge of operation strategy in the hunt for the terrorist mastermind.
Panetta received a call from National Security Officer Tom Donilon confirming that President Obama had made the decision to “proceed with the assault” on bin Laden‘s compound in Pakistan after assessing a risk profile. However, the memo, released by Time Magazine, states that “the timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands.”
“The direction is to go in and get bin Laden, and if he is not there, get out,” read the memo. It does not clarify whether the intention was to kill bin Laden or to capture him.
However, the memo also shows that President Obama was not in charge of operation strategy as the mission was being carried out. Rather, Panetta noted that, “the timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands.”
“The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration,” said the memo.
President Obama has said that the decision was one of the “gutsiest calls of any president in recent memory.” However, it seems that the “gutsy call,” was actually made by Admiral William McRaven, head of the Joint Special Operations Command.
Two days after the memo was written, bin Laden was assassinated by a team of Navy SEAL commandos.
Following the raid, Pakistan’s government claimed it had no knowledge of bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad. However, speculations have questioned how the terrorist’s presence in the compound could have been undetected by Pakistani officials when Abbottabad is home to a major Pakistani military base and only about 30 miles from the capital city of Islamabad.
please follow these links that influenced this video hereinbelow:
LEGALIZIN’ LOOTS
Hey, New York Times, Israel Cannot ‘Legalize’ Its Colonies in the West Bank!
Well, I just wrote a similarly titled post about how the Washington Post reported on this very same issue. It’s a similar story with the New York Times. First, read that post.
Good, now check out the Times‘ version:
The Israeli government on Tuesday retroactively legalized three Jewish settlement outposts in the West Bank, and moved to delay the scheduled evacuation of a fourth, in a provocative move that some critics said marked the first establishment of new settlements in two decades….
As with most matters in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is disagreement over the basic facts concerning the three settlements…. The international community broadly views settlement in the West Bank as illegal, but Israel draws a distinction between those communities it has officially sanctioned and outposts that settlers built without permission.
So if you read my post on the Post’s version, you can already see the problems here:
1) Israel cannot by fiat declare that its colonies in the West Bank are “legal”. All its settlements in the West Bank are illegal, period.
2) The international community does not “broadly” view Israel’s settlements as illegal. It is a unanimous international consensus that Israel’s settlements violate the Geneva Conventions, to which it is a party. Not a single nation on this planet recognizes Israel’s colonies as “legal”. As with the Post, the Times gives equal weight to Israel’s view as the international community, thus fabricating a “disagreement over the basic facts” when none exists. It is not a matter for debate, not a matter of opinion, but an incontrovertible, uncontroversial fact that every inch of the West Bank is “occupied Palestinian territory” and every Israeli settlement illegal.
Hey, Washington Post, Israel Cannot ‘Legalize’ It’s Colonies in the West Bank!
The Washington Post reports:
Israel announced Tuesday that it has legalized three unauthorized Jewish outposts in the West Bank, a move that Palestinians and anti-settlement activists condemned as a step toward creating the first new settlements in more than a decade….
Settlements are a core point of dispute in the frozen peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, who view the housing developments as Israeli land-grabbing and want construction to stop before resuming negotiations. Israel says the issue should be discussed during peace talks.
Although most foreign governments consider all settlements illegal, Israel applies that label only to about 100 so-called outposts that were built without official authorization, sometimes on private Palestinian land.
This kind of biased reporting is standard fare in the U.S. media. If you don’t see the bias, I’ll break it down for you:
1) The Post reports that Israel “legalized” Jewish “outposts” in the West Bank. That is false. All Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal, and Israel’s claim that it may “legalize” its colonies has no legal standing. (See also #3.)
2) The Post reports that Palestinians “view” Israel’s colonies as “land-grabbing”, as though this was merely a perception. Israel’s illegal colonization of the West Bank is ipso facto land-grabbing.
3) The Post reports that “most foreign governments consider all settlements illegal”, the usual euphemism in the U.S. media, as though some countries consider Israel’s settlements to be legal. That is false. There is a unanimous international consensus, and it’s not a matter of opinion. Every nation on the planet recognizes the incontrovertible fact that Israel’s colonization of the West Bank is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, to which Israel is a party. Not a single nation on Earth considers Israel’s settlements to be “legal”, except, of course, for Israel, whose view is given equal weight as that of the international consensus by such means as the above. (Which goes back to #1.)
4) The Post says Israeli colonies are “sometimes” built “on private Palestinian land”. What it does not clarify is that every inch of the West Bank is Palestinian land, whether it is privately owned or otherwise, and every settlement is always built on Palestinian land.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Your Highness, many groups from in and outside Bahrain called for the Formula 1 race that was held last weekend to be cancelled. Can you justify the fact that it took place?
Khalifa: I was very happy that it took place, despite all the negative comments we saw before the Formula 1 race. I was there and saw the whole race. It was a happy event for all Bahrainis.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: In the meantime, the protests in your country are continuing. The opposition claims the government’s reforms do not go far enough and that you aren’t really interested in a dialogue.
Khalifa: First of all, this is a movement of people which, in the modern world, we call a “terrorist group.” This movement is supported by Iran and Hezbollah. What we are facing is exactly what the Americans are facing with terrorism.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Are you comparing serious Bahraini opposition groups like Al Wefaq with a terrorist network?
Khalifa: I am specifically talking about all those who are calling for violence and destruction. About those who are burning tires, throwing Molotov cocktails at police and are terrorizing the rest of this country.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: So you reject a dialogue?
Khalifa: We are open to dialogue. Our door remains open, but those who say they want dialogue have to remember that the participation of all sectors of Bahraini society is needed in order for these efforts to bear fruit. But let’s not forget, we have offered the opposition a dialogue in the past and they walked out of it. The king has gone a long way in making many offers to them, but in the end they told us they had to wait to see what Iran would tell them. Now we are experiencing daily violence on our streets. If I were to ask the Americans to engage in a dialogue with terrorist organisations, such as al-Qaida, what do you think they would say?
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Al-Qaida conducted terrorist attacks against the United States. The protesters just say they want reforms.
Khalifa: Reforms? If only this truly were about reforms. We started reforms a long time ago — earlier than any other Arab country. The king also made clear he wanted to continue with further reforms. We also have a very sophisticated welfare state in Bahrain that offers its citizens free education and health care, subsidizes housing and living allowances — and even includes unemployment benefits. I hold the opposition’s religious leader, Issa Qassim, responsible for everything that is going on in this country, especially for all the people who have been killed. And Qassim is taking his orders from Iran.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: People are protesting every day in the suburbs of the capital city of Manama. These demonstrations often end in altercations between the police and protesters. How would you like to resolve the situation in your country? Khalifa: We have to apply the law against everyone who broke it. These people are destroying public property and they are attacking police and Asian expatriate workers. It is our duty to protect all people in Bahrain. We are a multicultural society and we do not want that to change.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Does this mean you will use more police force against the protestors?
Khalifa: We do not want bloodshed in this country. Our police are only here to protect the people and not to attack or kill them. So far, we have shown a great deal of patience with the opposition. We made mistakes on our side, but the king brought in the Bassiouni Commission (an independent panel led by Egyptian-American human rights expert Cherif Bassiouni to carry out an inquiry into the protests and resulting violence), which was very critical of our past actions. We have accepted (the report) and have now implemented some of (the commission’s) recommendations. We are currently processing other proposed reforms through the parliamentary process and constitutional court. But has the international community ever questioned the opposition or held them accountable for their actions?
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Abdulhadi al-Khawaja, the most prominent member of the opposition, who is currently in jail in your country, has been on a hunger strike for almost 80 days. His condition is very bad.
Khalifa: I beg to differ with you. His condition is not as bad as you say. According to the doctors attending to him on a daily basis, he takes liquids. The Danish ambassador visited him recently and said he was satisfied with the treatment being provided to him.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Why don’t you release al-Khawaja or extradite him to Denmark, where he lived in exile for a number of years and also has dual citizenship?
Khalifa: In Bahrain, the executive branch does not interfere in the judicial process. He has been accorded due process of law. He is a Bahraini citizen, and extraditing him to Denmark is against Bahraini law.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: But a number of international human rights groups and Western countries claim that your security forces are continuing to abuse protesters and opponents of the government.
Khalifa: I do not think these accusations are legitimate. How do Western police deal with unlawful and violent protests? Are they just letting protesters there throw stones and Molotov cocktails? When it comes to national security, human rights aren’t the most important thing. Or did the Americans and their allies think about human rights when they marched into Iraq and Afghanistan?
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The opposition in your country are just asking for more rights, particularly those within the Shiite majority of Bahrain’s population.
Khalifa: The opposition is only looking for excuses, abusing demands for “more rights” and “democracy” to turn Bahrain into a second Iran. We have Sunni and Shiite ministers; and we have Shiites who are very rich. It simply isn’t true that the Shiites in Bahrain are poor and oppressed. They left parliament, they blocked our roads and they put this nation in jeopardy. They hung effigies of myself, the king and the crown prince with nooses around our necks and signs saying, “Death to Al Khalifa.” This is democracy.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: The opposition groups are demanding that you resign from your post as prime minister and say it could be the first step toward stopping the protests. When will you listen to their calls and step down?
Khalifa: This is for the king to decide. My duty was and remains to protect this country, and I will do this until the last day of my life. Believe me, if my position alone were the reason for the unrest, then I would have already stepped down from my office last year. But this is just a further excuse from the opposition. I am very proud of Bahrain’s achievements and the role I have played in realizing them. We have also established Bahrain as a multiethnic and multicultural country, and the majority of our people are against the efforts of those who seek to sow the seeds of division.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: But the fact is that you have governed since 1971, making you the longest-serving prime minister in the world. That’s very unsual for a democracy.
Khalifa: So what? Democratic systems are very different. The system in Thailand is different from Russia, and the form practiced in Germany differs from that of the United States. So why can’t we also be different?
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Some countries in the Arab world have already changed: Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, for example.
Khalifa: Do you think I am happy to see what has happened in all these countries? This is not an “Arab spring.” Spring is connected with flowers, happy people and love — not death, chaos and destruction. And how did Britain react when the country experienced its own “Arab spring” last year when young people started to steal and attack?
SPIEGEL ONLINE: You mean the riots in London and other cities? But the British weren’t asking for more rights.
Khalifa: Just because people in Bahrain claim to be acting in the name of democracy does not make their actions any less bad than what happened in Britain last year.
SPIEGEL ONLINE: Bahrain is highly dependent on Saudi Arabia. Last year, soldiers from the Gulf states marched into your country under Saudi Arabian command.
Khalifa: Saudi Arabia has never put pressure on us. We are members of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf and it was our right to ask our allies for help. When the Americans went into Iraq and Afghanistan, they also asked their allies for help and no one said a word about it. But we got criticized when we did.
Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ to be reprinted in Germany for first time since 1945 Read How Klaus Tscharnke of Jewish-World-Review Horrified from Printing Stupid Trash: Tuesday’s decision by the state of Bavaria, which controls the copyright, means the book will be available again in three years, when its German copyright expires, but with content warnings throughout. It follows years of agonized debate about whether Germans remain susceptible to Nazi ideology and how to stop it reviving. The book is available in many other countries. After meeting anti-Nazi activists in Nuremberg, the city that once hosted Nazi Party rallies, Bavarian Finance Minister Markus Soeder said a complete edition, with annotations throughout by historians warning against Hitler’s errors, would help demystify the book. Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider “must-reading”. In addition to INSPIRING stories, HUNDREDS of columnists and cartoonists regularly appear. Sign up for the daily update. It’s free. Just click here. A separate edition for schools also would be issued, with historians already at work writing the commentary. “In all the editions, we want to make clear what nonsense the book contains as well as its fatal consequences,” Soeder said. Bavaria also will fund scholars to analyze Hitler’s speeches to the Nazi Party rallies in Nuremberg to see how he recycled his ideas. Hitler published “Mein Kampf” in two volumes, in 1925 and 1926, seven years before he was elected German leader in 1933. The book set out race theories, claiming the Germans were superior Aryans, whereas Jews and others were inferior. Nearly 10 million copies were printed in the Nazi period. A free copy was given to every German couple when they got married. Bavaria took over all of Hitler’s assets, including his copyrights, after his 1945 suicide. It has since blocked all attempts to republish his writings A change of approach is necessary because copyright in Germany expires 70 years after an author’s death.
Author’s Note, April 23, 2012: I have removed the word “gated” from my description of the Twin Lakes community per the following link: “According to Ryan Julison, assistant to Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump, Twin Lakes is actually not entirely gated.
There is also no guard at the gate, there are no high fences. The community is just modest condos, Julison says, not protected with the electronic equivalent of a…
Hoodlumism Execution in the Old Jim Crow South, Where Complexion Counted More Than Facts
Here is Some Mindsteroid Must-Read: Who Is ‘Racist‘? by Thomas Sowell
Whatever the ultimate outcome of the case against George Zimmerman for his shooting of Trayvon Martin, what has happened already is enough to turn the stomach of anyone who believes in either truth or justice. An amazing proportion of the media has given us a painful demonstration of the thinking – and lack of thinking – that prevailed back in the days of the old Jim Crow South, where complexion counted more than facts in determining how people were treated. One of the first things presented in the media was a transcript of a conversation between George Zimmerman and a police dispatcher. The last line in most of the transcripts shown on TV was that of the police dispatcher telling Zimmerman not to continue following Trayvon Martin. That became the basis of many media criticisms of Zimmerman for continuing to follow him. Only later did I see a transcript of that conversation on the Sean Hannity program that included Zimmerman’s reply to the police dispatcher: “O.K.” That reply removed the only basis for assuming that Zimmerman did in fact continue to follow Trayvon Martin. At this point, neither I nor the people who assumed that he continued to follow the teenager have any basis in fact for believing that he did or didn’t. Why was that reply edited out by so many in the media? Because too many people in the media see their role as filtering and slanting the news to fit their own vision of the world. The issue is not one of being “fair” to “both sides” but, more fundamentally, of being honest with their audience. NBC News carried the editing even further, removing one of the police dispatcher’s questions, to which Zimmerman was responding, in order to feed the vision of Zimmerman as a racist. In the same vein were the repeated references to Zimmerman as a “white Hispanic.” Zimmerman is half-white. So is Barack Obama. But does anyone refer to Obama as a “white African”? All these verbal games grow out of the notion that complexion tells you who is to be blamed and who is not. It is a dangerous game because race is no game. If the tragic history of the old Jim Crow South in this country is not enough to show that, the history of racial and ethnic tragedies is written in blood in countries around the world. Millions have lost their lives because they looked different, talked differently or belonged to a different religion. In the midst of the Florida tragedy, there was a book published with the unwieldy title, No Matter What … They’ll Call This Book Racist. Obviously it was written well before the shooting in Florida, but its message – that there is rampant hypocrisy and irrationality in public discussions of race – could not have been better timed. Author Harry Stein, a self-described “reformed white liberal,” raised by parents who were even further left, exposes the illogic and outright fraudulence that lies behind so much of what is said about race in the media, in politics and in our educational institutions. He asks a very fundamental question: “Why, even after the Duke University rape fiasco, does the media continue to give credence to every charge of racism?” Harry Stein credits Shelby Steele‘s book White Guilt with opening his eyes to one of the sources of many counterproductive things said and done about race today – namely, guilt about what was done to blacks and other minorities in the past. Let us talk sense, like adults. Nothing that is done to George Zimmerman – justly or unjustly – will unlynch a single black man who was tortured and killed in the Jim Crow South for a crime he didn’t commit. Letting hoodlums get away with hoodlumism today does not undo a single injustice of the past. It is not even a favor to the hoodlums, for many of whom hoodlumism is just the first step on a path that leads to the penitentiary, and maybe to the execution chamber. Winston Churchill said, “If the past sits in judgment on the present, the future will be lost.” He wasn’t talking about racial issues, but what he said applies especially where race is involved. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His Web site is http://www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page.
please follow these links that influenced this video hereinbelow:
Holder shares the President’s radical vision, but unlike Obama, he doesn’t have to pretend to be a moderate. Lucky us!
As Attorney General, Eric Holder has been an unapologetic radical, launching a crusade against our civil liberties and American values. He’s lied repeatedly to Congress about the catastrophic gun running debacle he sponsored in Mexico and the dismissal of a voter intimidation case against Black Panther poll watcher-thugs. He’s refused to recognize the Defense of Marriage Act—a law passed by Congress—and he’s waged a secret war against the 2nd Amendment. Worst of all, Holder has continually spewed racial intolerance and division.
The Freedom Center’s definitive exposé on Holder, “Ten Reasons to Impeach Eric Holder”, is hot off the press, and I want you to have a copy right away. For your immediate tax-deductible donation of $25 or more, I’ll rush you this pamphlet.Please follow this link right away to donate.
Written by former Justice Department lawyer and whistleblower J. Christian Adams (who saw the Attorney General up close and personal), “Ten Reasons to Impeach Eric Holder” reveals a Justice Department under siege from within. This must-read pamphlet shows how Holder has ripped the blindfold off of American justice and put a contraband gun in one of her hands and a fraudulent ballot in the other.
Most importantly, “Ten Reasons to Impeach Eric Holder” makes the disturbing case that the man who is supposed to guarantee the rule of law has undercut our national security, attacked the integrity of our elections, and defied our Constitution. This is why the Freedom Center urgently needs your help to get this pamphlet into the hands of Americans everywhere. We have a crisis situation on our hands and we must act before respect for our laws is destroyed altogether.
Every day there is a new outrage from Holder’s Department of Justice. We are racing against time to get this crucial exposé into the hands of your friends and neighbors. Thank you and thank you for helping the Freedom Center protect our country.
LEGALIZIN’ LOOTS
April 28, 2012LEGALIZIN’ LOOTS
Hey, New York Times, Israel Cannot ‘Legalize’ Its Colonies in the West Bank!
Well, I just wrote a similarly titled post about how the Washington Post reported on this very same issue. It’s a similar story with the New York Times. First, read that post.
Good, now check out the Times‘ version:
The Israeli government on Tuesday retroactively legalized three Jewish settlement outposts in the West Bank, and moved to delay the scheduled evacuation of a fourth, in a provocative move that some critics said marked the first establishment of new settlements in two decades….
As with most matters in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, there is disagreement over the basic facts concerning the three settlements…. The international community broadly views settlement in the West Bank as illegal, but Israel draws a distinction between those communities it has officially sanctioned and outposts that settlers built without permission.
So if you read my post on the Post’s version, you can already see the problems here:
1) Israel cannot by fiat declare that its colonies in the West Bank are “legal”. All its settlements in the West Bank are illegal, period.
2) The international community does not “broadly” view Israel’s settlements as illegal. It is a unanimous international consensus that Israel’s settlements violate the Geneva Conventions, to which it is a party. Not a single nation on this planet recognizes Israel’s colonies as “legal”. As with the Post, the Times gives equal weight to Israel’s view as the international community, thus fabricating a “disagreement over the basic facts” when none exists. It is not a matter for debate, not a matter of opinion, but an incontrovertible, uncontroversial fact that every inch of the West Bank is “occupied Palestinian territory” and every Israeli settlement illegal.
Hey, Washington Post, Israel Cannot ‘Legalize’ It’s Colonies in the West Bank!
The Washington Post reports:
Israel announced Tuesday that it has legalized three unauthorized Jewish outposts in the West Bank, a move that Palestinians and anti-settlement activists condemned as a step toward creating the first new settlements in more than a decade….
Settlements are a core point of dispute in the frozen peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, who view the housing developments as Israeli land-grabbing and want construction to stop before resuming negotiations. Israel says the issue should be discussed during peace talks.
Although most foreign governments consider all settlements illegal, Israel applies that label only to about 100 so-called outposts that were built without official authorization, sometimes on private Palestinian land.
This kind of biased reporting is standard fare in the U.S. media. If you don’t see the bias, I’ll break it down for you:
1) The Post reports that Israel “legalized” Jewish “outposts” in the West Bank. That is false. All Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal, and Israel’s claim that it may “legalize” its colonies has no legal standing. (See also #3.)
2) The Post reports that Palestinians “view” Israel’s colonies as “land-grabbing”, as though this was merely a perception. Israel’s illegal colonization of the West Bank is ipso facto land-grabbing.
3) The Post reports that “most foreign governments consider all settlements illegal”, the usual euphemism in the U.S. media, as though some countries consider Israel’s settlements to be legal. That is false. There is a unanimous international consensus, and it’s not a matter of opinion. Every nation on the planet recognizes the incontrovertible fact that Israel’s colonization of the West Bank is a direct violation of the Geneva Conventions, to which Israel is a party. Not a single nation on Earth considers Israel’s settlements to be “legal”, except, of course, for Israel, whose view is given equal weight as that of the international consensus by such means as the above. (Which goes back to #1.)
4) The Post says Israeli colonies are “sometimes” built “on private Palestinian land”. What it does not clarify is that every inch of the West Bank is Palestinian land, whether it is privately owned or otherwise, and every settlement is always built on Palestinian land.
Share this:
Like this:
Tags:amarcnn, andrew-lebovich, arab, as'ad, ask-marion, –saudigrok, caryle-murphy, cempaka, cempaka-africa, chippshots, connie, conservative-byte, crethi-plethi, crethiplethi, dandelion-salad, Dandelionsalad, darius-kadivar, darkpolitricks, defense-technology, diane-a.-wade, dr.-lasha-darkmoon, editors, elder-of-ziyon, end-lieindependent, eslkevin, follow, foreign-policy, ged, george, global-public-square, guido-fawkes, hereinbelow: http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com http://americankafir.wordpress.com http://angryarab.net http://arab.net http://arabiadeserta.com http://askmarion.wordpress.com http://belle.com http://cemp, influenced, informed-comment, iversity-and-dissent, 청경수려淸勁秀麗, jeha, john-robertson, joshua, journalist, juan, karki, kumpulan-artikel-pribadi, links, madison-ruppert, marketing, matthew-levitt, michael-singh, middle-east-.-files-at-web-.-com, middle-east-focus, mideast-dispatch-archive, mohammed-haider-ghuloum-phd, mondoweiss, mv-media, my-logic-of-truth, myartikel, national-paper, noor-al-haqiqa, nterview conducted by Souad Mekhennet please, nysoulcontrolla, omnibus-dubitandum, ow-team-Monday, paddy-fields-view, pakistan-daily-times-current-&-breaking, palestine, paul, philip-giraldi, pictures-of-day, pukhtunkhwa-times, qifa-nabki, r-mew, race-for-iran, recruitment-agencies-in-dubai, rivka-shpak-lissakl, sandmonkey, seder, snippits-and-snappits, steve, studi-me-africa, studies-and-research-on-middle-east-and-africa, sustg, syria-comment, that, thenakedfacts, these, this, today-in-palestine, tom, trends, uly-maniago, understanding-each-other, unknown, uprooted-palestinian, uprooted-palestinians, video, waqar, war-in-context, washington-note, winds-of-change.net, wn.comarticles-related-to-fresh-start, zawya.comeconomy-&-politics, zawya.comiran
Posted in PainfulPolitics | Leave a Comment »