[imra] Daily digest - Volume: 2 Issue: 1361 (15 messages)

imra Sun Apr 2 00:22:06 2006 Volume 2 : Issue 1361

In this issue of the imra daily Digest:

Results compared to last pre-election Polls
& Likud members prefer Netanyahu over Shalom 49%:26%
Interview: Prof. Paul Eidelberg
on failure of Hazit Party in elections
Excerpts: Arab double-speak 31 March 2006
Lebanese Resistance Vows to Continue
Armed Resistance Against Israel
President Assad's Interview with PBS US TV Network
Syrians on "Land Day":Popular Committee to
...Resist the Zionist Project
Summary of IDF Activity in the Gaza Strip
Last Night [shelling empty fields]
Prime Minister's Office Director-General
Ilan Cohen Announces That He Will Resign Upon
Formation Of The New Government
PCHR Condemns the Clashes between Palestinian
Gunmen and Security Personnel in Gaza City
Excerpts:Saudi going nuclear?Abu Dhabi investing
$600 million real estate building.Blame on Syria.1 April 2006
Document: With elections over IDF admits permitted
rocket attacks from PA security force positions in Gaza
Summary of IDF Activity in the Gaza Strip Last Night
IDF Targets Structure Used By Terrorists in Gaza
[empty buildings added to empty fields as targets]
STATEMENT by Middle East QUARTET
Text: Prof. Paul Eidelberg praises the 25,935 people
who voted Hazit Party [instead of party that got elected]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Results compared to last pre-election Polls
& Likud members prefer Netanyahu over Shalom 49%:26%

Results compared to last pre-election Polls & Likud members prefer
Netanyahu over Shalom 49%:26%

Aaron Lerner Date:31 March 2006

#0 = Actual results

#1 Telephone poll of a representative sample of 503 adult Israelis
(including Arab Israelis) carried out by Maagar Mochot on 25 March after the
end of the Sabbath for the Mishal Cham television program..

#2 Telephone poll of a representative sample of adult Israelis (including
Arab Israelis) carried out by Dialogue for Channel 10 and Haaretz on 26
March 2006 (poll completed early afternoon)..

#3 Telephone poll of a representative sample of adult Israelis (including
Arab Israelis) carried out by Dahaf for Yediot Ahronot on 26 March 2006

#4 Telephone poll of a representative sample of adult Israelis (including
Arab Israelis) carried out by Teleseker for Maariv on 26 March 2006

Knesset election vote expressed in mandates[current in brackets]
#0 is actual outcome

#0 #1 #2 #3 #4
29 34 36 34 34 [00] Kadima
12 12 14 13 14 [40] Likud
20 19 18 21 17 [22] Labor
00 00 00 00 00 [15] Shinui (both the party and the break-away "Secular
Zionist Party")
12 08 11 11 12 [11] Shas
09 07 08 07 07 [08] Arab parties
05 06 06 05 05 [06] Yachad [Meretz]
09 08 12 09 11 [07* & 6] National Union & NRP
11 15 07 12 12 [07*] Yisrael Beiteinu [Lieberman]
06 07 06 06 06 [05] Yahadut Hatorah
07 02 02 02 02 [00] Gil [retired people's party headed by Rafi Eitan]
* National Union & Yisrael Beiteinu together have 7 seats

====

Telephone poll of a representative sample of Likud Party members carried out
by Maagar Mochot on 30 March (two days after the elections) for the Hatzofe
newspaper and published on 31 March in Hatzofe:

Who would you like to lead the Likud Party - Netanyahu or Shalom?

Netanyahu 49% Shalom 26% Neither 13% Don't know/refuse reply 12%

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Interview: Prof. Paul Eidelberg
on failure of Hazit Party in elections

Interview: Prof. Paul Eidelberg on failure of Hazit Party in elections

Dr. Aaron Lerner 31 March 2006

IMRA interviewed Prof. Paul Eidelberg of The Foundation for Constitutional
Democracy, in English, on 31 March, 2006. Prof. Eidelberg was Number 7 on
the Hazit Party list headed by Baruch Marzel.

IMRA: A day before the elections, on 27 March, you advised that "Hazit has
already 62,000 people who have signed up to vote for our party". Yet now
that the votes have been counted it turns out that Hazit is reported to have
received only 25,935 votes - far below the 2% vote threshold of around
62,760. What is your explanation for the discrepancy?

Eidelberg: I assume that many - how many I don't know - who signed didn't
follow through. Of course I can think of other scenarios - stolen ballots.
But my best guess is that many were talked out. I know from many e-mails
that I received from people during the campaign that what most deterred them
from voting Hazit was the mantra of not voting for a small party

IMRA: Let me ask you this: We have gone through this several times now
that parties were adamant that even though the polls didn't show them
getting in that they still ran to the end. And each time some people have
warned that it is a fact of political life in Israel that , for better or
worse, whether you hate the pollsters or not, if you can't show in
independently commissioned polls that you can pass the threshold then you
just aren't going to be able to make it.

From a policy standpoint, when elections are held again, will you yourself
advocate again going for a party and continuing to the end if it doesn't
make it in the independent polls or instead will you next time around, when
you get to the last days, suggest to pull the plug if the situation is a
repeat of the last two elections, namely: parties that do not pass the
threshold in accordance with the polls?

Eidelberg: I have a very simple response to this: Rabbi Kahane didn't make
it in his first two attempts to enter the Knesset. And the third time he
finally got in.

IMRA: In the last time did the polls show he was going to get in?

Eidelberg: I don't know.

IMRA: That's the real question. That's the real issue.

Eidelberg: Suppose you took a poll the day before and you found that you
were just short of making the threshold. Would that deter you from doing it
when you still haven't gotten to the lection itself?

IMRA: We are talking about passing in several polls. The retiree's party
is a good example. Before the elections they showed up passing in several
polls. In the previous elections the party Marzel ran in passed in one poll
out of the five that were published towards the end of the campaign and his
party didn't get through.

[Telephone connection lost]

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Excerpts: Arab double-speak 31 March 2006

Excerpts: Arab double-speak 31 March 2006

Friday, March 31, 2006
+++THE DAILY STAR (Lebanon) 31 Mar.'06:"Hypocritical Arab generosity on
Darfur"
By Julie Flint*

QUOTES FROM TEXT:"
"Arab League has invested ... less than one day's running costs [in
Darfur] "

"With unerring instinct the leaders of the Arab world have once again
seized the low moral ground"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:

It would be comical if it were not so cynical; cruel even. Arabs leaders
meeting at the Arab League summit in Khartoum ... offered to fund the
African Union (AU) peacekeeping force in Darfur to the tune of some $150
million, starting on October 1 of this year. However, the AU has been on the
ground in Darfur since 2004, and in all that time the Arab League has
invested $200,000 dollars in it - the equivalent, at the present rate of
expenditure, of less than one day's running costs.
... The AU's present mandate expires on September 30. That's either a big
saving or a very nasty piece of politicking.
... When it comes to Darfur, the Arabs have pretty much exhausted all the
possibilities within their range - from minimizing the unspeakably brutal,
wholly man-made tragedy, to turning two blind eyes to it ... .. The AU needs
strengthening now, today, while it is in Darfur; not in six months' time,
when it may not be. As Baba Gana Kingibe, the head of the AU mission in
Sudan, said on hearing of the Arab decision: "This is medicine after death.
We need the assistance now in order to be able to resolve the crisis."
The Arabs' sudden readiness to invest in the AU, comes as Khartoum
discovers a new enthusiasm for a force that it has until now relentlessly
obstructed. ... .
Their fear is ... that the AU will be replaced by a United Nations force
with teeth, which could act as a police force for the International Criminal
Court. As international pressure to pull the AU out grows, so too does
Khartoum's insistence on keeping it in. ... .
. . .
Although they [the Arab League] stopped short of an outright rejection of
wider international intervention in the conflict, they said there should be
no UN deployment without Khartoum's approval. They not only remained silent
about government atrocities in Darfur; they gave the victimizer the right to
decide who may, or may not, act on the victims' behalf.
. . .
In the next six months - months that Khartoum's Arab accomplices have chosen
to ignore - many people will die in Darfur. Because of growing insecurity,
both in Darfur and across the border in Chad, more than half a million
displaced and conflict-affected civilians are beyond the reach of relief.
The UN has raised only $130 million of the $650 million it needs for 2006.
... The UN's humanitarian chief, Jan Egeland, says he fears that Darfur is
returning to the "abyss" of early 2004 when the region was "the killing
fields of this world." He predicts that those who cannot be reached "will
soon get massively increased mortality."
But of that there was not a whisper in Khartoum this week. With unerring
instinct, the leaders of the Arab world have once again seized the low moral
ground.
Julie Flint has written extensively on Sudan. She is the author, with Alex
de Waal, of "Darfur: A Short History of a Long War."

Sue Lerner, Associate - IMRA

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Lebanese Resistance Vows to Continue
Armed Resistance Against Israel

Lebanese Resistance Vows to Continue Armed Resistance Against Israel
Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 08:55 PM

BEIRUT, (SANA - Syrian News Ageny)
www.sana.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&newlang=eng&sid=26184&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Lebanese national parties and forces have condemned Lebanese Premier stance
towards resistances during Khartoum Arab Summit.

" What Fouad Siniora has said is unacceptable, irresponsible and crystal
clear contradicts the ministerial statement and decision of the national
dialogue," the parties said in a statement published Thursday.

The statement welcomed President Emile Lahoud of Lebanon' s stance and
insistence on the resistance continuation till the liberation of all
Lebanese lands," considering his stances and proposals as "a true expression
of what worries consciousness of Lebanese honest citizens. "

The statement hailed the resistance important role, expressing complete
stand by the resistance to protect Lebanon and confront the Israeli
continuous violations.

Meanwhile, Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said that "
the resistance is the human and logic choice to liberate the land, restore
the captives and detainees from the Israeli occupation prisons as well as
the usurped rights,"

Nasrallah added, during his speech at the General Arab Conference to Back
the Resistance, that the resistance project will last as long as Israel
occupies the lands, usurps rights and detains captives as well continues
violation of the Lebanese airspace, lands and waters.

"We will cut off the hand and head of anyone who tries to force the
resistance to disarm," Hizbullah leader said.

" The UN 1559 resolution, which issuance was accompanied by international
pressures on Lebanon, aims at disarming Hizbullah in service of the Israeli
interests," Nasrallah said, asserting failure of these pressures as had, in
advance failed projects of affecting the resistance and weakening it.

He unveiled deals of paying large sums of money for Hizbullah to relinquish
resistance and drop down his arm, underlining that the resistance rejected
all these because there were no guarantees preventing Israel to attack
Lebanon.

Nasrallah also assured the conferees that the resistance in Lebanon is
strong and able to overcome all pressures being put on her due to its
credibility, honorable history, distinguished performance as well the
people's backing.

Hamas political Chief Khaled Meshaal for his part, renewed Hamas commitment
to the Palestinian national rights and the resistance, stressing
non-submission to any conditions.

Ghossoun /

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: President Assad's Interview with PBS US TV Network

President Assad's Interview with PBS US TV Network
Thursday, March 30, 2006 - 07:10 PM
www.sana.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&newlang=eng&sid=26144&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

"Definitely there were massacres that happened against the Jews during the
Second World War, but I'm talking about the concept and how they use it. But
I don't have any clue how many were killed or how they were killed, by gas,
by shooting... we don't know. "

=====

...
Journalist: When times are changing, every leader wants to be understood.
Tell me how would you want to be understood by the American leadership and
the American people?

President Assad: They have to understand me by understanding my culture as a
person. If they want to understand me as a president, they have to
understand whom I represent; and this is related to the culture of my
people. So, this the problem with the west: If I want to make an analogy to
two computers with different systems - if we talk about windows - we notice
that they do the same job but they have different systems. So, you have
sometimes some software to make the translation between the two systems. We
do not have to talk about the events; we have to explain and analyze these
events and translate them from our culture to another culture. That is what
we want from the media in your country and from the politicians. That is how
they can understand, and then they will understand that we need peace, we
need prosperity and we need reform.

....

Journalist: You think that the United States for example with all its
technology does not understand you, Syria, and the region?

President Assad: As I said earlier, when you don't understand the culture,
you don't understand the politics, especially in our region. If you don't
understand the culture and the politics, you don't understand what decision
we take as leaders and why, and what we say and why. That is why we always
have misunderstandings when we conduct a dialogue with many delegations
coming from the West, especially the United States. They ask us questions
that show how they misunderstand our vision and our beliefs and goals.

...
Journalist: And you have the same fear of terrorism that the United States
does?

President Assad: Exactly, because what happened in New York may happen in
Syria. So that is why we said we have to move now because we tried in the
eighties to convince some European countries that we have to make coalition
against terrorism. At that time nobody cared about what we said. Because now
after the eleventh of September most of the world is convinced about this
idea, we said let us move. So we started this cooperation and we told them.
I told one of the CIA officials, you have the information, but we have the
knowledge because as you said we defeated those.

Journalist: Muslim Brotherhood.

President Assad: Exactly. But it is not a matter of organization as you call
it or person or group. It is a state of mind. We have to know the culture to
know how to fight the state of mind, because those terrorists use any cause
and assume it as a mantle to make terrorist acts. So we know what mantle
they assume and we know how to fight this and how to deal with it. They
committed many mistakes in the United States regarding the security issue.
But this was not the main reason. The main reason is that you cannot have
the good, normal and sophisticated kind of cooperation between the
intelligence and at the same time you have animosity in the political field.
So we either have normal relations across the board as a package or let us
stop this cooperation.

...

President Assad: That whenever you have occupation, you have resistance.
Hizbullah, Hamas and Jihad emerged, I think Hizbullah in the mid-eighties,
Hamas and Jihad I don't know when, but because of the occupation of the
Palestinian territories and Lebanese territories. So this is something Syria
didn't make. But if you ask about the support of the whole region, the
people support the resistance. If somebody in the world or in the United
States called them terrorists, it is a label but we don't recognize this
label.

Journalist: Let me understand. If the USA says Hamas is a terrorist
organization and you say that is not the way we perceive them, so no matter
how much they have done with respect to Israel, no matter how many suicide
bombings and terrorist activities, you don't identify Hamas as a terrorist
organization?

President Assad: If you want to see the picture you have to see the whole
picture. If you talk about violence, let us talk about four thousand
Palestinians killed during the last five years while on the other side, the
Israeli side, few hundred are killed. So if you want to talk about the
violence and you call this violence terrorism, Israel killed more
Palestinians than the Palestinians killed Israelis. This is first. Second,
you have to see both sides. They talk about Hamas and what they did in
Israel but they don't talk about Israel and what they did in the Palestinian
territories. They assassinate people from time to time in public, and they
say it, "we are going to kill". So, this is the whole picture. Anyway, it
doesn't matter what label we put, if we want to have a solution we have to
deal with the facts not with the terms. Whether they are terrorists or not;
this is not the problem. We have to deal with the facts and the fact is if
you don't have peace, you will have more bloodshed. So we don't support
violence in Syria. This is part of the story.

Journalist: You don't support Hamas if Hamas is engaged in suicide bombings;
you don't support it. If Israel is engaged in acts of occupation that are
destructive of life, you don't support it.

President Assad: By the word "support" I mean we don't encourage. We support
them politically because they have the right to have their own state, they
have the right to have their land back, and they have the right to implement
Security Council Resolutions. That is what we support.

Journalist: But here is an interesting thing. Hamas, for example, just won
the election and now they are trying to form a government. Your country,
Saudi Arabia, other Arab League members met in Beirut with a peace plan with
Israel that supports the right of Israel to exist. Correct?

President Assad: Yes, you mean the Arab initiative?

Journalist: Yes, the King Abdullah initiative.

President Assad: Yes, exactly.

Journalist: Hamas does not accept that. It does not accept the right of
Israel to exist.

President Assad: Let me explain this. For example, Syria. Let us talk about
Syria. We started the peace negotiations in 1991 with Israel. We said when
Israel withdraws from our lands we recognize Israel. So when you say
recognize you say it when you achieve peace. Anyway, when you have peace
talks with Israel, this means you recognize the reality of Israel. But when
you say verbally that we recognize it politically, that will come as a
result of the peace. So, the position of Hamas is like this. They used to
say we accept Israel but now they don't say it. Recently, Hamas has become
very pragmatic, very realistic.

Journalist: They have not changed any of their principles verbally.

President Assad: They said if you want us to do something, then for what?
For example, when we started our peace talks with Israel, it was to get our
land back. Now there is nothing to offer from Israel. If you want Hamas to
do something, Israel has to say we are ready to give something. They have to
meet half way.

Journalist: But shouldn't Hamas say we recognize the right of Israel to
exist. We are prepared to negotiate in the same way the Palestinian
authority was doing?

President Assad: I will tell you. There was something like we did. I will go
back to our experience. I think both sides have to recognize the UN and the
Security Council resolutions. This is the solution. According to those
resolutions, you have an Israeli state and a Palestinian state. So it is a
very good idea. Both of them will have a state but through Security Council
resolutions.

Journalist: We cannot treat this without including all of it, as you pointed
out. Israel is electing a new leader in a new party next week. It is said
the likely candidate to win is Ehud Olmert. It is said that he wants to
withdraw from settlements on the West Bank but to be firm on the boundaries
of Israel in the next ten years, partly with a fence. It is said that if
Olmert becomes the Prime Minister and his party in coalition is the
majority, he wants to firm up Israeli boundaries including a fence that is
already on the way, and he wants to withdraw from the West Bank settlements.

President Assad: That will take me back to what I said in the previous
answer: the solution is through United Nations or Security Council
Resolutions. Security Council resolutions define the borders by June 1967.
So the fence is much far behind. I mean behind Palestinian territories. So
this won't lead to any solution. The facts proved that this fence wouldn't
do much to Israel, so I will advice any rational Israeli to go back to these
resolutions. This is the main solution. You may sometimes win some
political, security and military battles but eventually you need the
stability and it happens when you have normal relations. The fence won't
give you normal relations. It is a matter of people not governments.

Journalist: But you can't have normal relations unless Hamas is prepared to
recognize the right of Israel to exist. You, your country and Iran are
providing economic support to Hamas, yes?

President Assad: No, we don't support Hamas. First of all, we support the
Palestinians. What do we support? We support their rights as I said. We used
to support Hamas because we saw that Hamas represents the will of
Palestinians, and this is democracy. The latest elections proved that we
were right.

Journalist: That they have popularity.

President Assad: Exactly. Now they are elected. If you want to call them
terrorists, then call them elected terrorists. It doesn't matter. But they
are elected. They represent the Palestinians. You can't say all the people
are terrorists.

Journalist: Do you think that Hamas, which now controls the government, they
won the elections, they are a majority, is prepared to recognize the right
of Israel to exist?

President Assad: If it is mutual, yes. But if you talk one way, then no. It
should be mutual. What about Israel? Do they recognize the Palestinian
state? We should ask them the same question.

Journalist: How to do that?

President Assad: Through United Nations resolutions. President Bush, two
years ago, I think, or may be a little bit more talked about two states:
Israeli and Palestinian.

Journalist: He was the first U.S. president who talked about the right of
Palestinians to have their own state.

President Assad: That is what we want and what Hamas and all Palestinians
expect. So nobody said they are going to have their own state and they are
going to make the Israeli state vanish. We haven't heard about this.

Journalist: What is your government, or what are you encouraging Hamas to
do?

President Assad: To hold on to the rights of the Palestinian people, which
are political rights. This is very clear. These rights are the refugees'
right, because we have half a million refugees from Palestine in Syria and
five to six million in other Arab countries who are not allowed to go back
to their territories, the right to have a state and the right to have normal
relations like any other state.

Journalist: If the Israelis, and the Americans, say they will never give up
Jerusalem, will never allow the right of return, will never completely go
back to the 1967 borders, is peace then impossible?

President Assad: It is. because you make peace through dialogue, through
taking into consideration the rights of everybody, through making
compromises and through implementing what the international community wants
through the Security Council resolutions.

Journalist: Your father came very close to negotiating with the Israelis a
peace treaty between Syria and Israel with the Golan Heights being returned
to Syria and some rights of the Israelis. very close!

President Assad: That was during Rabin's government; and actually Rabin was
very serious in his efforts to make peace with Syria before his
assassination; and if we are to use numbers, we say approximately 80% was
achieved. The rest was some details about water because we resolved the
security arrangements. What was left was some details, which means we indeed
were very close, but the assassination of Rabin cancelled and stopped
everything.

Journalist: Let me move to Hizbullah. American officials have said to me the
reason Syria is on the list of countries that support terrorism, and
therefore come under criticism from America, is because of your relationship
to Hizbullah. This is because they believe Hizbullah is a terrorist
organization notwithstanding the fact that it won elections in Lebanon.

President Assad: You should always go back to the majority of the people.
There was a poll a month ago in Lebanon about how many of the Lebanese
support Hizbullah. The poll showed 80-85 percent support Hizbullah. So it is
not a matter of Syria, nor is it a matter of what you label Hizbullah, but
rather it is a matter of the people. That is what I want some of your
officials to understand; it is not a matter of Syria. We support the
Lebanese people. They had Israeli occupation for twenty-two years, and that
is why they had Hizbullah and different organization.

Journalist: But the Israelis left under Ehud Barak?

President Assad: Exactly. But that happened without a peace treaty. They
should have signed a peace treaty with Syria and Lebanon and everything
would be normal. But now every Lebanese is worried about another attack by
Israel; and Israeli aircraft continue to violate the Lebanese airspace
everyday. So there is no peace actually. Israelis only withdrew militarily.

Journalist: But do you consider Hizbullah as a terrorist organization?

President Assad: No. It never attacked any civilians. It only defends its
country; and it is not interested in launching attacks inside Israel. It
only defends the Lebanese borders, and this is its right.

Journalist: So there are no attacks by Hizbullah?

President Assad: No. There aren't any.

Journalist: Is that because of the urging of Syria and You?

President Assad: We need stability in general, and we need stability in
Lebanon. That is why we always play a role to have stability, but when you
want to play this role you need cooperation. For example I received a
telephone call from Mr. Anan last week about the southern borders in Lebanon
where he asked me to play a role because they heard some rumors about some
conflict. I said we are ready and we need stability, but who is going to put
pressure on Israel. This is because you have two sides and you cannot talk
about one side only. When you talk about borders, about two countries, you
should talk about two sides.

Journalist: Has the withdrawal of Syria from Lebanon meant that Iran has
more influence with Hizbullah than Syria?

President Assad: Our influence is with the Lebanese as a whole and not only
with Hizbullah. Hizbullah represents a big part of the Lebanese, and Iran
has good relations with it and with many Lebanese. So, I would not say our
influence in Lebanon is becoming weaker, nor would I say the Iranian role is
becoming stronger. I think it is still the same situation but in a different
way. Syria and Iran have different ways of tackling the Lebanese problems
now.

Journalist: Why did you withdraw Syrian troops from Lebanon?

President Assad: Actually we started that five years ago, and precisely in
the year 2000. We did that because the situation in Lebanon became more
stable between the end of the civil war and 2000 when we started
withdrawing. By then Israel had withdrawn from the largest part of Lebanon
in 2000 and because when you have your army outside your country it is
expensive politically, economically and in other aspects.

Journalist: But it was an occupation?

President Assad: No. We entered Lebanon upon a Lebanese request.
Journalist: You in no way consider the presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon
an occupation?

President Assad: No, I do not. If it was occupation we should have had
resistance against it. We were not occupiers. But how did the Lebanese fight
Israel for twenty-two years and did not fight Syria? That is because we were
not occupiers.

Journalist: Most people suggest that the decision to withdraw the majority
of Syrian troops from Lebanon came after the assassination of Hariri.

President Assad: That is true. We started in 2000 withdrawing from Lebanon
because we had to. Before the assassination of Hariri, there was resolution
1559, issued at the end of 2004, which asked all foreign troops to leave
Lebanon. Before that resolution 63% of our troops withdrew from Lebanon, but
we took the decision to completely leave Lebanon after the assassination of
Hariri.

Journalist: Because?

President Assad: Because part of the Lebanese thought that Syrian
assassinated him. They stood against Syria after being our allies. That is
why we withdrew; we cannot stay in Lebanon when some Lebanese are against
Syria.

Journalist: With respect sir, perhaps the UN investigators think that, and
the world opinion thinks that, Syria to a large degree has something to do
with the assassination of Hariri.

President Assad: This is because some of the Lebanese said that. They tried
after the assassination to accuse Syria. There is no logic in that. Rafic
Hariri was a friend of Syria and supported Syria in the most difficult task
for him which was the extension of president Lahoud's term in office. Hariri
was against it, but he did it for Syria.

Journalist: And by doing it he was challenging Syria?

President Assad: No. He agreed to do what we wanted.

Journalist: Tell me what happened in the famous meeting between you and him
before he was assassinated.

President Assad: We talked about the extension and we told him "we think the
extension is necessary now". He said I am not with that decision, yet at the
same time I will be with Syria. He was very good, and that is what happened.
I told him "we do not want to embarrass you in this subject, you have the
right to say yes or no." If he said no it would have been difficult for
Syria to do it or convince the others to do it. I said to him "you can tell
us in two or three days". Two days later he said I will be with Syria and do
it. That is what happened in that meeting.

Journalist: This is not the first time you hear what I will say now. The
story that has gained some credibility, is that you threatened him. that "I
will bring down Lebanon on your head."

President Assad: Let us put morals aside. We condemn the crime...

Journalist: The assassination was a crime and you condemn it because it was
not good for Syria?

President Assad: Exactly. But let us put this aside. If you would do such a
bad thing would you threaten? You would not. Second, if you threaten him,
you threaten somebody in order to make him do something, and if he doesn't
do it you may do what you said, but if he does it why harm him? If he does
what you want, why harm him? It is a contradiction.

Journalist: It is said that he came back and told his son that you
threatened him!

President Assad: That is not true. We heard later that he said that somebody
from the Syrian Intelligence put a gun to this head, but Hariri himself told
me that some officials in the West told him that they were angry with him
because he stood by Syria. He told me that, but may be he told them he did
that for this reason. Actually, neither me nor anybody else in Syria
threatened him.

Journalist: Do you believe that anyone in Syrian Intelligence, anyone, had
something to do with the assassination of Hariri?

President Assad: No, for one reason: such kind of operations needs a big
team because it is very sophisticated. One person cannot do it; there must
have been a team, an organization, another country's intelligence
Journalist: But that is just the point the UN investigators have suggested:
This was a very sophisticated effort and took people who know something
about assassinations and conspiracy. Perhaps the theory was between Lebanese
and Syrian Intelligence.

President Assad: First of all, it's not part of our history to have
assassinations. We were in Lebanon to prevent this kind of assassinations
and we lost more than ten thousand soldiers for that purpose. Second, what
do you get? If a government does such a thing you should ask, "what is the
interest?" There is no such interest in what was going on. Third, and as you
said, because it is sophisticated you need an apparatus. This means it wasn't
a single person. It is more than that. Yet, if there is anyone who is
involved, he is going to be labeled as a traitor as I said previously. Such
traitor will be punished. But there is a difference between a traitor and
the apparatus or government behind him. So far, there is no clue or evidence
that any Syrian is involved, neither in intelligence nor in the government
or outside the government.

Journalist: You are going to have a conversation with the UN investigators
in the next couple of weeks. It is a conversation and not an interrogation,
and you are going to tell them essentially what you were telling me.

President Assad: Exactly.

Journalist: If they present evidence to you that a member of you family,
whether it's your brother or your brother-in-law, is involved and you
believe it, what will you do?

President Assad: First, let me tell you that I am sure there is no such
evidence. I am sure 100 percent. Second, if we assume that anyone, Syrian or
not, is involved and they have evidence they should put it in the report.
This is their job. So why ask me? Why present the evidence to me? They have
to put it in the report.

Journalist: Has all of this in any way jeopardized your leadership and power
in Syria?

President Assad: No. Maybe at the beginning it distracted everybody,
including me. Everybody was saying, "What the hell was going on in Lebanon
and the region?" But in a short time everybody was talking about a play, and
if you ask anybody in Syria now he will tell you it's a game.

Journalist: But who is playing the Game?

President Assad: If you go back to the two Mehlis reports, you'd find they
were prepared in advance. The two witnesses were fake. The first didn't
confess and we had clues and presented them to Mehlis, while the second came
to Syria and said he was forced to say things this or that way. It was a
play. That's why most people in Syria know that everything about the reports
was political. There was nothing about having a professional investigation.
Maybe recently with the new commissioner we hope things would go better as
we see it now, but we have to wait and see.

Journalist: There is an election coming in 2007. The Secretary of State of
the United States goes around the Middle East promoting democracy; the
president promotes democracy as well. They say the way that did not work was
supporting regimes that are not democratic, and so we have to change. How do
you see that? They constantly say democracy is the answer for the Middle
East.

President Assad: Definitely, democracy is necessary for the entire world,
but not in that context. If you want now to talk about the credibility of
those who say such statements, let us take an example: If I look east I find
Abu Ghreib, and if I look west I find Goantanamo.

Journalist: Certainly these are not the things that America is proud of.

President Assad: What is the relation between democracy and occupying a
country like Iraq? What is the relation between democracy and having five to
six million Palestinians outside their country? There are many things that
harm the credibility of those people. Yes, we need democracy but our
democracy. And if you say what is the meaning of our democracy you have to
go back to culture. It should be step by step and should be internal by
dialogue among the people of this country and society, and the Middle East
at large. Any imported democracy, regardless the will behind it, is going to
be a failure.

Journalist: Do you think there will be a democracy in Iraq?

President Assad: That depends on how I see it now. Is democracy more
important than chaos? What is it based on? Is it based on better economy, on
safety? What are the benefits of democracy if you don't have the essential
things in society? Democracy isn't everything. It is a tool you use to have
a better situation. You don't use it to only say you are democratic.

Journalist: There is no democracy in Jordan, in Saudi Arabia, They had
elections but.

President Assad: Elections are the end result of democracy. Democracy is how
people think and accept each other. In mixed societies like ours you would
have different democracies than what you have in your country.

Journalist: Another issue in this region is Iran's efforts, as perceived by
many people, to have a nuclear weapon. Do you believe they want a nuclear
weapon?

President Assad: No. They said publicly they have no interest in having
nuclear weapons. I think Iran is a strong country without nuclear weapons.
Secondly, we do not think the Middle East needs more troubles. Thirdly, we
submitted a draft resolution to the Security Council to make the Middle East
a zone free of Weapons of Mass Destruction. That is how we see it as Syria.

Journalist: The new President of Iran visited you here and you visited him
in Tehran. What do you make of a man who says there was no Holocaust?

President Assad: If you ask may people in the region they would say to you
that the West exaggerated the Holocaust. People say there was a Holocaust
but they exaggerated it.

Journalist: You don't believe that though, do you?

President Assad: It's not a matter of how many were killed, half a million,
six million or one person. Killing is killing. For example, eight million
Soviets were killed, so why don't we talk about them? The problem is not the
number of those killed but rather how they use the Holocaust. What do the
Palestinians have to do with the Holocaust to pay the price?

Journalist: Even people that I know in Iran say they don't believe what the
President is saying. There are people who believe it.

President Assad: In my country you'd see two opinions as well.

Journalist: I want to make sure I understand what you believe. You believe
there was a Holocaust where the anti-Semite Nazis killed millions.

President Assad: We, Arabs, are Semitic too. Definitely there were massacres
that happened against the Jews during the Second World War, but I'm talking
about the concept and how they use it. But I don't have any clue how many
were killed or how they were killed, by gas, by shooting... we don't know.

Journalist: Part of the Nazi policy was to exterminate the Jews. This is not
just a massacre.

President Assad: We see what's going on in Palestine the same way, but you
don't see it the same way. During the Second World War we didn't live in
Europe; we were far and we don't see it the way the Europeans see it. What
happens in Palestine affects us directly, yet you do not see it the same way
we see it. Six million Palestinians are outside their country and other tens
or hundreds of thousands were killed in the last decades.

Journalist: Let me talk about your future and reform. Give me a sense of
what you want to do. Clearly you said you want economic reform before the
political reform and you look at the Chinese model. For them, the Chinese,
there is a booming economy which benefits their people.

President Assad: I didn't invent reform. Reform starts from the challenges
that you have. Our reform starts from the challenges, problems, obstacles
and complaints before us. If you sit with any Syrian, you'll mainly hear
about the question of better living standards and more jobs. Syria is about
18 million people and 60 percent of them are under 25 years old. 300,000
babies are born every year and 200,000 need jobs every year. The most
dangerous challenge for our country is to offer jobs for those young people.
Second, the political reform is linked to economic and cultural reforms and
to upgrading the whole society. But you need to have priorities. I do not
mean by priorities a sequence, where I do the economic reform first then the
political and so on, but rather to move in parallel terms.

Journalist: But the central point is to create jobs.

President Assad: We should focus on the economic field first because it can't
wait; people are hungry because there is poverty and people want to make
sure that their children go to good schools and that they have a good
medical system. People can wait for other fields. In spite of that we are
moving in all the fields together.
People can wait for other fields. In spite of that we are moving in all the
fields together. But what has changed in the last five years? In the first
place our priority was economy then politics, but now after 9/11 events and
the way they dealt with terrorism our priorities have changed.

Journalist: How did that change your priorities?

President Assad: First, our priority now is security because in the last two
years we started to have more terrorism after we hadn't seen it for two
decades. Second comes the economy and then other fields. Now everybody is
worried about their security. This change in priorities is not good for us,
and it isn't something we want but rather something we cannot ignore. This
change of priorities won't stop reform.

More important than this is the state of mind. When you talk about democracy
for example it is a state of mind to accept the other. When you have
terrorism this is based on extremism. When you have extremism and terrorism
you won't have democracy because extremists and terrorists do not accept the
other. That is why I said earlier that democracy is about how to accept the
other opinion. That is how we were affected by the war on Iraq and the war
on Afghanistan.

Journalist: Let me talk about the Shiite crescent. King Abdullah says there
is, from a political perspective, a Shiite crescent from Iran to Iraq to
Hizbullah. They talk about that linkage as something to fear.

President Assad: Exactly. If you use this term, regardless of the sects you
put under it, it means you destroy the region. This is very dangerous, and
we said no, let us talk about diverse societies. That is how we lived for
thousands of years or more.

Journalist: And that is exactly what is happening in Iraq today: sectarian
violence and militias from one sect fighting militias from another.

President Assad: Exactly. When you talk of Sunnis, Shiites, Arabs and Kurds
you are disintegrating the country.

Journalist: And disintegration will spread across the borders.

President Assad: We have the same mosaic in the whole Middle East and all
are linked together.

Journalist: But you believe America does more damage to stability by staying
than leaving because the argument goes the only thing standing between
all-out civil war is America's presence in Iraq today.

President Assad: First, whenever there is war there are very bad side
effects no matter what its causes are or where it is. Any war is something
bad for any region, and the invasion of Iraq is a war. Second, they
committed a lot of political mistakes. Now we have an accumulation of
political mistakes through the last three years. That is why you have these
results.

Journalist: Do you believe the moderate Islamic community has done enough to
identify and criticize within Islam the extremists like al-Qaeda and others
who many say are blasphemous to the Qura'n. Many people say the world wants
more of the moderate Muslims to speak out.

President Assad: This is true. In general you fight extremism through
moderation, but you cannot separate moderation in Islam from moderation in
politics or moderation in society. The same applies to extremism. So if you
have a very sore political issue, you will have a very sore society. You
will have extremism in society and extremism in religion. So what you say is
correct, but you need a climate to help.

Journalist: How do you get that climate?

President Assad: Through just political stands regarding the different
issues in hot spots around the world. Second, by spreading culture and
culture means dialogue. Third, by developing economically. Through economy
you can reach farther than through any other means. The last resort, if
necessary, is the intelligence cooperation but not war. War, wrong political
stands and unfairness will lead people to lose hope. When they lose hope at
least they won't be moderate.

Journalist: Finally, I want to end with a sense of the relationship with the
United States. Do you believe the United States wishes your government good
or not?

President Assad: I wouldn't talk about the United States but rather about
the administration. They have two wings, and may be more. Each wing sees the
situation from his way and from overseas through some research centers, and
that's why they don't know anything about our region, as such there might be
one, two or a thousand viewpoints about the region and they won't see
reality at the end. This is the case. Some people wish bad things, some
people wish very bad things, and some people wish to have dialogue and
cooperation with Syria.

Journalist: What about the Secretary of State and the president?

President Assad: We never met.

Journalist: Do you like to?

President Assad: We'd like to have cooperation with the administration, with
people who take decisions.

Journalist: Help me understand right now. What would be a kind of
quid-pro-quo, what would be an appropriate dialogue?

President Assad: First of all, as American officials you have to talk with
me about your interests, and as a Syrian official I have to talk with you
about my interests. If you ask them about Iraq they would say, "we want
stability, we want to support the political process, and we won't stay in
Iraq," and in Syria we want stability, support the political process and don't
want to see any foreign troops there. So, we share the same titles with the
Americans, and that is why we can find common interests.

Journalist: And if they say Hizbullah is an issue?

President Assad: No. Hizbullah is part of the peace process. If they say
they need peace we say we want peace. When there is peace you won't have any
problem with Hizbullah or Hamas. So, the problem is not the organizations
but rather the peace process. If they don't like these organizations they
have to find a solution, and the solution is through peace.

Journalist: If there is peace and there is a change in Iraq, and if somehow
politics and security work in Iraq, you would hope that there could be a
renewal of the relationship with the United States, and therefore there will
be no sanctions or restrictions and economic trade would flow between
American companies and consumers in Syria.

President Assad: No one in the region wants bad relations with the United
States. It is a great power and the most advanced country in the world. It
is very beneficial for us to have good relations. In politics we depended on
them for a long time to achieve peace and we want to depend on them in
developing our country in many different fields.

Journalist: And you want to go back to the point where you were sharing
intelligence information and cooperation in fighting against al-Qaeda?

President Assad: Exactly, but we should take into consideration our
interests. The problem with this administration is that they talk of their
interests only and don't talk of the interests of other countries. This
problem is not only with Syria but also with many countries. But if you talk
about the end results, they haven't achieved their own interests. Four years
after the 9/11 events what has the world achieved? Did it achieve any
better? I cannot see that. They have to deal with the facts instead of
wasting time discussing wishful thinking and titles and slogans.

Journalist: George Bush will leave office in 2008. Will Bashar al-Assad be
in office in 2008?

President Assad: You should ask the Syrian people and not me. But I would
like to spend my lifetime working for my country. It is early to talk about
this.

Journalist: I close on this, but here is the dilemma in understanding you.
You are as James Bennett said to many people, "you are an enigma." They say
on the one hand you are a dictator and on the other hand not in control;
they say on the one hand you want to reform and on the other hand you are a
captive of your father's advisors.

President Assad: This is because they see reform as one word and as one
world. There are hundreds and thousands of reforms according to each
country. If they understand us and our circumstances and history, they will
understand what reform I'm talking about. But when they see me going with
reform in a different direction due to my own circumstances and facts, they
will think he is talking about reform but going in a different direction. I
have my own reform which is different from your reform, and if you are
democratic you should accept my reform. That is why they say I am enigmatic,
but we invite them to come and see that we are very clear; and I think we
are the clearest among the countries of our region. We are not enigmatic at
all. We are very clear.

Journalist: Thank you very much for allowing us to visit you here in
Damascus.

President Assad: You are welcome in Syria.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Syrians on "Land Day":Popular Committee to
...Resist the Zionist Project

A Big Wall Painting to Commemorate Land Day
Friday, March 31, 2006 - 10:55 AM

DAMASCUS, (SANA - Syrian News Agency) -
www.sana.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=26241&newlang=engA wall painting of 500 meters long drawn by Syrian artists inaugurated onThursday to commemorate the land day in 1976. Chairman of the Popular Committee to Boost the Palestinian Intifada andResist the Zionist Project opened the fresco that covered the pavement andthe fence of the Trade Unions federation building in Damascus. " It is executed by Syrian plastic artists to boost the brave Intifada onthe land day," Ahmed Abdul Karim said. The land day is to commemorate the killing of six Palestinians by Israeliforces of security in March 30 1976 during fierce protests against theirlands confiscation.Meantime, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine saluted in astatement on Thursday the land day memory, saying this event hadconsolidated a fact that the Palestinian territories must remain so and thatPalestinians who are living there will saty whatever the means of oppressionand killing of the
Israeli forces of occupation are.In the occupied Palestinian lands, tens of thousands of the Palestiniansdemonstrated to express rejection of demolishing houses and confiscatinglands by the Israeli forces of occupation in 1976.Sawsan

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Summary of IDF Activity in the Gaza Strip
Last Night [shelling empty fields]

March 31st, 2006
IDF SPOKESPERSON ANNOUNCEMENT

Summary of IDF activity in the Gaza Strip last night

In light of the continued firing of projectile rockets at Israel from the
Gaza Strip, aimed against Israeli citizens and civilian infrastructure, the
IDF has increased its activity against projectile rocket launching cells in
the Gaza Strip.

As part of this activity, the IDF carried out aerial attacks last night,
March 31st 2006, targeting three projectile rocket launching grounds, open
areas on the outskirts of Gaza, ten access routes and a bridge. These, in
addition to artillery fire and naval artillery fire at launch sites, are
meant to disrupt Palestinian terror cells' repeated attempts to fire rockets
at Israel and to cause harm to Israeli civilians.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Prime Minister's Office Director-General
Ilan Cohen Announces That He Will Resign Upon
Formation Of The New Government

Prime Minister's Office Director-General Ilan Cohen Announces That He Will
Resign Upon Formation Of The New Government
(Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Prime Minister's Office (PMO) Director-General Ilan Cohen this morning
(Thursday), 30.3.06, agreed with Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that Ra'
anan Dinur will succeed the former as PMO Dir.-Gen. by the beginning of May
and the formation of the new Government.

PMO Dir.-Gen. Cohen had expressed his desire to resign and return to the
private sector following the hospitalization of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.
He proposed an orderly transition with Ra'anan Dinur in order assure
continuity in the administration of the PMO and of the special projects in
the various stages of planning and implementation, such as the Negev
development strategy, the multi-year Jerusalem development plan, finishing
dealing with the former residents of Gush Katif and various budgetary and
economic issues.

PMO Dir.-Gen. Cohen expressed his satisfaction that his successor will be Ra
'anan Dinur, whom he esteems highly in light of the successful cooperation
and friendship between them.

Acting Prime Minister Olmert thanked PMO Dir.-Gen. Cohen for his service and
commended his work in planning and implementing the Disengagement Plan, in
managing various crises and in his work during the absence of Prime Minister
Ariel Sharon from his post due to the latter's illness.

Acting Prime Minister Olmert and PMO Dir.-Gen. Cohen agreed that the latter
would continue to serve as a special adviser to the former for various
projects.

PMO Dir.-Gen. Cohen said: "These have been among the most complex and
dramatic years in the history of the State of Israel in every respect. I
very much appreciate the Acting Prime Minister for cooperating with the PMO
and for his warm relationship with me during the transition period. I will
always remember the unique opportunity of having been called to work with
Ariel Sharon."

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon appointed Ilan Cohen PMO Director-General on
9.5.04 in order - inter alia - to coordinate the disengagement project,
implement socio-economic reforms and promote multi-year planning in the
Government.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: PCHR Condemns the Clashes between Palestinian
Gunmen and Security Personnel in Gaza City

PCHR
Palestinian Centre for Human Rights
Press Release

Ref: 37/2006
Date: 01 April 2006
Time: 11:00 GMT

PCHR Condemns the Clashes between Palestinian Gunmen and Security Personnel
in Gaza City

On Friday, 31 March 2006, Gaza City witnessed armed clashes between members
of the Popular Resistance Committees and members of Palestinian Security
Forces, resulting in the death of 4 people and the injury of 36 others,
including 3 seriously injured.

The events started in the morning hours with the death of El-Abed El-Qouqa,
the commander of Naser Salah El-Deen Brigades (the armed branch of the
Popular Resistance Committees, PRC). El-Qouqa was killed by an
explosive-laden car that was detonated as he was walking beside it in the
western part of Gaza City. The PRC accused Palestinian security forces and
Fatah leaders of killing El-Qouqa.

Armed clashes erupted between gunmen of the Naser Salah -el-Deen Brigades
and Palestinian security personnel in Wehda Street in Gaza City. Two
bystanders were injured. The situation escalated, and clashes ignited near
the Sheikh Radwan Cemetary. Three people, including one child were killed
and 34 were injured, 3 of them seriously.

Sources in Shifa Hospital in Gaza City informed PCHR's fieldworker that
El-Qouqa was pronounced dead upon arrival. He was killed by shrapnel all
over the body, and his body was badly charred by the explosion.

After El-Qouqa's death, the PRC spokesman, Mohammad Abdel Al (Abu Abir)
accused Palestinian security of the murder, pointing out a number of figures
including: Mohammad Dahlan (Palestinian Legislative Council Member), Samir
El-Mash'harawi (Fatah leader), Rashid Abu Sh'bak (Director of the
Preventive Security Apparatus), and Tariq Abu Rajab (Director of General
Intelligence).

At approximately 14:00, armed clashes took place between PRC members and
guards of the house of Samir El-Mash'harawi, located near the place where
Abu Abir was holding a press conference. Two bystanders were injured, and
taken to Shifa Hospital for treatment. After this incident a large number of
Preventive Security troops, charged with guarding Mash'harawi, closed off
the area around the house.

Naser Salah El-Deen gunmen clashed with members of Preventive Security and
the guards of Nabil Tammous, an officer in Preventive Security. The clashes
took place during the funeral procession of El-Qouqa to the Sheikh Radwan
Cemetary, near Tammous's house. The clashes continued for several hours. The
final tally was 3 dead: a PRC member, one of Tammous's guards, and a child.
Thirty-four people sustained injuries, 3 of them seriously. The 3 dead
victims were:
- Hisham Abu Taha (27), a PRC member from Rafah;
- Seif El-Deen Mohammad Ahmad El-Halis (37), a preventive security
member and guard of Nabil Tammous's house. He was killed by a bullet to the
head; and
- Sadat Abu Hamda (15), a resident of Gaza City who was killed as
he passed through the area.

Medical and police sources in Shifa Hospital informed PCHR's fieldworker
that 36 injured were admitted to the hospital for treatment. The majority of
the injuries were moderate, and 3 were very serious injuries.

PCHR strongly condemns these clashes, and:
- points to the serious concern over the continued misuse of
weapons by armed Palestinian groups and security personnel, which is a
continuum of the ongoing security chaos;
- stresses that these incidents are a continuation of the ongoing
security chaos in the occupied Palestinian territory (OPT), caused by the
lack of serious legal procedures by the Palestinian National Authority
(PNA) to confront these incidents;
- calls upon the PNA, represented by the Attorney General, to
investigate these crimes, and to bring the perpetrators to justice; and
- Calls upon all Palestinian factions and armed groups to adopt
dialogue and reject violence and arms to resolve internal disputes, and to
avoid harming civilians.

Public Document
**************************************
For more information please call PCHR office in Gaza, Gaza Strip, on +972 8
2824776 - 2825893
PCHR, 29 Omer El Mukhtar St., El Remal, PO Box 1328 Gaza, Gaza Strip.
E-mail: pchr@pchrgaza.org, Webpage http://www.pchrgaza.org
-----------------------------------
If you got this forwarded and you want to subscribe, send mail to
request@pchrgaza.org
and write "subscribe" in the subject line.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Excerpts:Saudi going nuclear?Abu Dhabi investing
$600 million real estate building.Blame on Syria.1 April 2006

Excerpts:Saudi going nuclear?Abu Dhabi investing $600 million real estate
building.Blame on Syria.1 April 2006

+++ARAB NEWS (Saudi) 1 April '06:"Kingdom Denies Nuke Report"
QUOTES FROM TEXT:
"denied a German magazine report it was working on a secret nuclear
program with the help of Pakistani experts"
"German magazine Cicero said ... during the Haj seasons in 2003 through
2005, Pakistani scientists posing as pilgrims came to Saudi Arabia in
aircraft sponsored by the kingdom"
"Saudi bar codes can be found on half of Pakistan's nuclear weapons"
"Saudi Arabia has set up ... a secret underground city and dozens of
underground silos for missiles"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
JEDDAH, 1 April 2006 - Saudi Arabia yesterday denied a German magazine
report that it was working on a secret nuclear program with the help of
Pakistani experts. ... .
Pakistan also rejected the report.
"It is a fabricated story and motivated by vicious intentions," Foreign
Office spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said.
Citing Western security sources, German magazine Cicero said in its latest
edition that during the Haj seasons in 2003 through 2005, Pakistani
scientists posing as pilgrims came to Saudi Arabia in aircraft sponsored by
the Kingdom.
Between October 2004 and January 2005, some of them took the opportunity to
"disappear" from their hotel rooms, sometimes for up to three weeks ... .
According to Western security services cited by the magazine report, Saudi
scientists have been working since the mid-1990s in Pakistan, ... .
Cicero, ... also quoted a US military analyst, John Pike, as saying that
Saudi bar codes can be found on half of Pakistan's nuclear weapons.
The magazine also said satellite images prove that Saudi Arabia has set up
in Al-Sulaiyyel, south of Riyadh, a secret underground city and dozens of
underground silos for missiles.

+++THE DAILY STAR (Lebanon) 1 April '06:"$600 million project for central
Beirut"
QUOTES FROM TEXT:
"luxury residential and business accommodation"

"Solidere is the main contractor"

"did not set a date for the implementation of the project"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
BEIRUT: Privately-owned Abu Dhabi Investment House (ADIH) has launched a
real estate project in central Beirut worth around $600 million. ... will
include ...luxury residential and business accommodation ... .
The United Arab Emirates firm launched a $160 million private stock
placement in January to finance the first phase ... it expected the
placement to offer a return on investment of 37.5 percent over an 18 month
period.
He did not set a date for the implementation of the project, one of the
biggest investments in central Beirut ....
... Solidere, Lebanon's biggest company, is the main contractor in the area.

+++THE DAILY STAR (Lebanon) 1 April '06:"Jumblatt blasts Syria and its
'tool' Nasrallah", by Daily Star staff

QUOTES FROM TEXT:
" 'Syrians entered the country with the blood of [Druze leader] Kamal
Jumblatt, and left the country with the blood of [former Prime Minister]
Rafik Hariri' "

"described Hizbullah ... as a 'tool in the hands of the Syrian regime' "

" 'Maybe the Arabs don't want to change the Syrian regime ... they don't
like democracy a lot' "

" 'When you are attached to this regime (Syria) in the name of the
national an Palestinian cause you become brainwashed' "
" 'it is impossible to change the actions of a regime that is used to
assassinations and terrorism' "
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
BEIRUT: The head of the Democratic Gathering, MP Walid Jumblatt, said Friday
the "Syrians entered the country with the blood of [Druze leader] Kamal
Jumblatt, and left the country with the blood of [former Prime Minister
Rafik Hariri." In an interview with LBC late Thursday, Jumblatt strongly
attacked the Syrian regime and its allies in Lebanon and described
Hizbullah Secretary General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah as a "tool in the hands
of the Syrian regime."
. . .
He also said that Syrian President Bashar Assad had "a storehouse of
terrorists," asking about the reason why "Arab countries are afraid of him
and of his tiny group that monopolizes the country."
Jumblatt added: "Maybe the Arabs don't want to change the Syrian regime;
they have their considerations and they respect laws and customs; they don't
like democracy a lot and they are unable to change Assad's behavior."
Jumblatt continued: "[U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice talked about
changing the behavior and I said during my visit to the U.S. that it is
impossible to change the actions of a regime that is used to assassinations
and terrorism."
"Consequently, we are in trouble; the March 14 forces and all the Lebanese
should know that reinforcing the country against this regime takes a lot of
time," he said.
Jumblatt also directly accused a former official in the Syrian intelligence,
Ibrahim Howaiji, of killing his father, Kamal Jumblatt.
"Those who perpetrated the crime were all Syrians; there weren't any
Lebanese accomplices," he said.
As for his former close relations with the Syrian regime and his decision to
turn against it, Jumblatt said: "When you are attached to this regime in the
name of the national and the Palestinian cause, you become brainwashed."
He added that he made the decision to stand up against the Syrian regime
following the assassination attempt that targeted Telecommunications
Minister Marwan Hamade.
He added that it is "impossible to acquit Syria and the Lebanese security
regime from the assassination of Hariri."
Asked about claims of a secret meeting between him and French President
Jacques Chirac, Jumblatt said: "I met with Chirac and we agreed not to
inform the media about the meeting. We have talked about the situation in
Lebanon." He refused to reveal more details.
According to the Druze leader, the influence of Syria is still present in
Lebanon due to Hizbullah's support.
Jumblatt said that Nasrallah was a "tool in the hands of the Syrian regime
to exert control over Lebanon."
. . .

Sue Lerner, Associate - IMRA

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Document: With elections over IDF admits permitted
rocket attacks from PA security force positions in Gaza

March 31st, 2006
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Attributed to "security sources" - [distributed by IDF Spokesperson]

Following intensified rocket attacks, IDF increases activity in Gaza Strip

The past week has brought about an escalation in the use of rocket attacks
against Israel, as well as the introduction of a new type of weaponry in the
Gaza Strip: on Tuesday two Israeli Beduins were killed by a previously
launched projectile rocket shell which exploded when they came in contact
with it; also on Tuesday a Katyusha rocket was launched against Israel from
the Gaza Strip for the first time; on Thursday a Qassam rocket hit the
Israeli community of Karmia. Life for Israeli citizens living around the
Gaza Strip is unbearable, and the constant barrage of rockets on innocent
civilians can not and will not be tolerated by the State of Israel.

Following these attacks, and projectile rocket attacks in general, the IDF
has increased its activity against projectile rocket launching cells in the
Gaza Strip.

Following the IDF pullout from the Gaza Strip, Palestinian security forces
moved into the evacuated territories, including evacuated areas in the
northern Gaza Strip, and set up numerous posts in these areas. Nonetheless,
projectile rocket launchings from these areas, at times right by security
forces' posts, has continued unabated. Yesterday, March 30th 2006, the IDF
warned Palestinian security forces located both in and near projectile
rocket launching grounds to stay clear of the launching sites. The IDF will
respond directly and specifically to any launches from the northern Gaza
Strip. To do this the IDF will implement a wide array of response methods,
including response from the air, land and sea. Nevertheless, the IDF will
continue to do everything within its power in order to avoid harming
innocent civilians.

The IDF has notified the head of Palestinian National Security of this
decision, and has warned him to remove his forces from the areas in
question. The IDF will not be responsible for Palestinian security personnel
who are harmed as a result of an IDF response to Palestinian rocket-fire in
these areas. It is important to note that, although this warning is also
obviously directed towards Palestinian civilians, civilians are not present
in these areas, which are mainly used by Palestinian security forces and
terror cells.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Summary of IDF Activity in the Gaza Strip Last Night

April 1st , 2006
IDF SPOKESPERSON ANNOUNCEMENT

Summary of IDF activity in the Gaza Strip last night

Following the continuous and escalating launching of projectile rockets from
the Gaza Strip at Israeli communities, which has caused repeated injury and
damage to civilians and civilian infrastructure, IDF forces targeted the
following sites:
- A large structure in the Northern Gaza Strip used as a base for
terrorists firing projectile rockets at Israel.
- Two open vacant areas in the city of Gaza.
- Launching grounds in the Northern Gaza Strip from which terrorists
have been firing the rockets at Israel. The launching grounds were targeted
by IDF naval artillery fire.

The IDF will continue to act determinately in order to defend the citizens
of the State of Israel and will continue to employ all means at its disposal
to combat terror.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: IDF Targets Structure Used By Terrorists in Gaza
[empty buildings added to empty fields as targets]

April 1st, 2006
IDF SPOKESPERSON ANNOUNCEMENT

IDF Targets Structure Used For Terror Activity in the Northern Gaza Strip

Following continuous Palestinian terror activity directed at Israeli
targets, including the firing of projectile rockets from the Gaza Strip at
Israeli communities, which have caused repeated injuries and damage to
civilians and civilian infrastructure, the IDF carried out an aerial attack
early this morning, April 1st, 2006, against a structure in the Northern
Gaza Strip used as a base for terrorists firing projectile rockets into
Israel.

The IDF will continue to employ all means at its disposal to combat
terrorists and their supporters in order to defend the citizens of the state
of Israel.

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: STATEMENT by Middle East QUARTET

30 March 2006
Secretary-General
SG/2110
PAL/2043

Department of Public Information . News and Media Division . New York

STATEMENT by Middle East QUARTET
www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sg2110.doc.htm

The following statement was issued today by the Middle East Quartet (United
Nations, European Union, Russian Federation, United States):

The Quartet recalled its statement of 30 January and its call for the new
Palestinian Government to commit to the principles of non-violence,
recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements and
obligations, including the "Road Map".

The Quartet welcomed President Abbas' call for the new Palestinian
Government to commit to a platform of peace and, having carefully assessed
the programme of the new Government approved on 28 March, noted with grave
concern that the new Government has not committed to the principles spelled
out on 30 January.

The Quartet recalled its view that future assistance to any new Government
would be reviewed by donors against that Government's commitment to the
principles outlined above. The Quartet concurred that there inevitably will
be an effect on direct assistance to that Government and its ministries.

The Quartet encouraged continued humanitarian assistance to meet the basic
needs of the Palestinian people. The Quartet noted in that context the
importance of improved movement and access.

The Quartet reiterated its commitment to the principles outlined in the Road
Map and previous statements, and reaffirmed its commitment to a negotiated
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict leading to two democratic
States living side by side in peace and security.

* *** *

------------------------------

From: imra@netvision.net.il
To: imra@imra.org.il
Subject: Text: Prof. Paul Eidelberg praises the 25,935 people
who voted Hazit Party [instead of party that got elected]

[IMRA: A copy of the interview with Prof. Eidelberg follows]

In Defense of Baruch Marzel

Prof. Paul Eidelberg 1 April 2006
www.foundation1.org

Spokesmen and supporters of National Union and the National Religious Party
are denouncing Baruch Marzel (and his Jewish National Alliance-Hazit) for
having deprived NU-NRP of one mandate.

Before addressing this issue, let me first congratulate the 25,935 people
who voted Hazit. You did not succumb to the paltry propaganda about not
"wasting your vote on a small party." Hence you are the most highly
principled and intelligent citizens of Israel, and I salute you!

You were not influenced by polls and petty pollsters. What concerned you
was not numbers or quantity, but names and quality; and you saw in Baruch
Marzel, and in the names of Hazit's candidates, character, courage and
uncompromising conviction. That's what you voted for, and this is why you
did not vote for NU-NRP.

You would not vote for any party that joined a government whose prime
minister was committed to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

You would not vote for any party that signed a coalition agreement that
obliged the signatories to abide by the Oslo covenant of death.

You would not vote for any party that joined a government whose prime
minister pursued the immoral policy of self-restraint toward Arab terrorism,
a policy that resulted in the murder of 1,000 Jews.

You would not vote for any party that remained in a government whose prime
minister nullified the 2003 election by adopting the opposition party's
policy of "unilateral disengagement," a policy rejected by the vast majority
of the electorate.

And you would not vote for any party that remained in that government while
its perfidious prime minister was preparing the IDF and the police to
dispossess and deport 10,000 Jews from Gush Katif and northern Samaria.

Again I salute you for voting for Baruch Marzel's party, which alone called
for the abrogation of Oslo, zero-tolerance for Arab terrorism, and the
elimination of the Palestinian Authority, which, whether led by Fatah or
Hamas, is committed to Israel's annihilation.

The question remains: By voting for Baruch Marzel's party, did you deprive
NU-NRP of an additional mandate?

Possibly, but it's hard to say, because no one really knows how the 25,935
people who wisely voted for Hazit would have voted had they been deprived of
the opportunity to vote for the only party opposed to Israel's corrupt
Establishment of which NU-NRP is a part.

Although some voters, in the absence of Hazit, might have reluctantly voted
for NU-NRP, others might have reluctantly voted for Likud, or perhaps
another party. Many might have simply stayed home out of disgust. Baruch
Marzel wanted to give such people an alternative!

But let us suppose Marzel did deprive NU-NRP of an additional mandate. So
what! This may toughen up the flabby leaders of that compromised coalition.
They know that Hazit is a force, that even though it lacked money, was
blacked out by the media, and was undermined by the propaganda about not
voting for a small party, nevertheless, Marzel won the equivalent of one
mandate.

But wait! How many mandates did the NU-NRP deprive Hazit by that
self-serving propaganda?

In any event, NU-NRP leaders will now have to watch themselves on basic
issues, because Marzel's party will expose their failings, their
compromising of Jewish principles in the name of a shallow and shoddy
pragmatism. This alone justifies Marzel for competing in the 2006
elections.

To all who are committed to Israel's Jewish and territorial integrity, you
are indebted to Baruch Marzel!

========
Interview: Prof. Paul Eidelberg on failure of Hazit Party in elections

Dr. Aaron Lerner 31 March 2006

IMRA interviewed Prof. Paul Eidelberg of The Foundation for Constitutional
Democracy, in English, on 31 March, 2006. Prof. Eidelberg was Number 7 on
the Hazit Party list headed by Baruch Marzel.

IMRA: A day before the elections, on 27 March, you advised that "Hazit has
already 62,000 people who have signed up to vote for our party". Yet now
that the votes have been counted it turns out that Hazit is reported to have
received only 25,935 votes - far below the 2% vote threshold of around
62,760. What is your explanation for the discrepancy?

Eidelberg: I assume that many - how many I don't know - who signed didn't
follow through. Of course I can think of other scenarios - stolen ballots.
But my best guess is that many were talked out. I know from many e-mails
that I received from people during the campaign that what most deterred them
from voting Hazit was the mantra of not voting for a small party

IMRA: Let me ask you this: We have gone through this several times now
that parties were adamant that even though the polls didn't show them
getting in that they still ran to the end. And each time some people have
warned that it is a fact of political life in Israel that , for better or
worse, whether you hate the pollsters or not, if you can't show in
independently commissioned polls that you can pass the threshold then you
just aren't going to be able to make it.

From a policy standpoint, when elections are held again, will you yourself
advocate again going for a party and continuing to the end if it doesn't
make it in the independent polls or instead will you next time around, when
you get to the last days, suggest to pull the plug if the situation is a
repeat of the last two elections, namely: parties that do not pass the
threshold in accordance with the polls?

Eidelberg: I have a very simple response to this: Rabbi Kahane didn't make
it in his first two attempts to enter the Knesset. And the third time he
finally got in.

IMRA: In the last time did the polls show he was going to get in?

Eidelberg: I don't know.

IMRA: That's the real question. That's the real issue.

Eidelberg: Suppose you took a poll the day before and you found that you
were just short of making the threshold. Would that deter you from doing it
when you still haven't gotten to the election itself?

IMRA: We are talking about passing in several polls. The retiree's party
is a good example. Before the elections they showed up passing in several
polls. In the previous elections the party Marzel ran in passed in one poll
out of the five that were published towards the end of the campaign and his
party didn't get through.

[Telephone connection lost]

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il

------------------------------

From: imra-owner@imra.org.il
Subject: IMRA Subscription Info

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

For free regular subscription:
Subscribe at no charge: imra-subscribe@imra.org.il
Unsubscribe: imra-unsubscribe@imra.org.il

For free daily digest subscription:
Subscribe at no charge: imra-subscribe-digest@imra.org.il
Unsubscribe: imra-unsubscribe@imra.org.il

For a copy of all reports distributed for a given day please send a
message to:

monday@imra.org.il tuesday@imra.org.il wednesday@imra.org.il
thursday@imra.org.il friday@imra.org.il
saturday@imra.org.il sunday@imra.org.il
--------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of [imra] Daily digest - Volume: 2 Issue: 1361 (15 messages)
**********