CIUDAD DEL ESTE, Paraguay - The Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia has taken root in South America, fostering a well-financed force of Islamist radicals boiling with hatred for the United States and ready to die to prove it, according to militia members, U.S. officials and police agencies across the continent.

From its Western base in a remote region divided by the borders of Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina known as the Tri-border, or the Triple Frontier, Hezbollah has mined the frustrations of many Muslims among about 25,000 Arab residents whose families immigrated mainly from Lebanon in two waves, after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and after the 1985 Lebanese civil war.

An investigation by Telemundo and NBC News has uncovered details of an extensive smuggling network run by Hezbollah, a Shiite Muslim group founded in Lebanon in 1982 that the United States has labeled an international terrorist organization. The operation funnels large sums of money to militia leaders in the Middle East and finances training camps, propaganda operations and bomb attacks in South America, according to U.S. and South American officials.

U.S. officials fear …

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17874369/

“… Hezbollah does not engage in any activities in foreign land, nor does it have active or dormant cells…..”

———

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/07/hizballah_activity_in_north_am.php

Hizballah Activity in North America
By Andrew Cochran

Brian Hecht of The Investigative Project on Terrorism has prepared a quick reference guide to major Hizballah and Hizballah-linked illegal activity in the United States, Canada and Mexico:

“Hezbollah was responsible for the 1984 bombing of the Argentinean community centre which killed a high number of Jews and many other attacks on diaspora Jewish centres. When someone walks beside a supporter of Hezbollah with the sign “Long Live Nasrallah” one is essentially supporting someone with the sign “Long live Hitler” because both have the same agenda.”

She is referring to the bombing of “The Argentine Jewish Mutual Association,” AMIA a Jewish charities association headquarters in Buenos Aires on July 18, 1994 where 85 people were killed.
This has nothing to do with Iran but the Zionist liars try to connect this bombing to Iran, Hezbollah and even Syria to demonize these countries for further action against Islamic countries to expand their influence around the world.
http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=1346

Israel, its American cabal, and other deceivers had accused Hezbollah or its cells of being behind the explosion. But Hezbollah does not engage in any activities in foreign land, nor does it have active or dormant cells. Therefore, Ms. Kay is lying when she accuses Hezbollah. Before the bombing, there were number of anti-Semitic incidents in Argentina including Vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, threats to Jewish institutions, and other activities. In 2003, the Delegation of Israeli Argentine Associations (DAIA) Center for Social Studies reported 177 anti-Semitic incidents. Therefore, this bombing could have been carried out by internal enemies, including the military.

Barbara Kay who writes for a pro Zionist newspaper, National Post, where brought charge of ‘dress code’ for Jews and other religious minorities against Iran topresent Iran as another Nazi Germany and portrait the Iranian president as another Hitler through lies and deception –same as Barbara Kay who claims Hezbollah is responsible for the attack without any prove – we are hopeful to see National Post apologizes for Ms. Kay’s lies - as they did in the case of ‘dress code’ story – soon. Please read the following article for facts on this issue:
http://www2.irna.ir/occasion/amia-en/index.htm

Argentina’s Jewish community, the largest in Latin America, has close ties with the former president, Nestor Kirchner who also is Jewish. Mr. Kirchner has gone out of his way to court Argentine Jews by creation of a special commission to re-investigate the AMIA case.
Nestor Kirchner spoke at the United Nations General Assembly session and had extensively referred to Iran, criticized its policies, and demanded the extradition of suspects in the explosion of a Jewish center in Buenos Aires, the Argentinean capital that took place in 1994 in which 85 people were killed. But the representative for the victims of the bombing has criticized his speech before the UN, affirming that the president is trying “to gain other countries’ support as a cover for corrupt Justice Department.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=25279&sectionid=3510207

Argentina has financial problem and the Kirchner family is trying hard to bring money to improve the economy. Jewish community’s financial resources and their votes were important in Christina Kirchner’s victory for presidency. Leading American Jewish organizations, the Lobby, is very active in the politics of AMIA and have urged Interpol to issue international arrest warrants for the perpetrators of a 1994 bombing attack against the Jewish community building in Buenos Aires.
Immediately following the explosion at the Argentinean Jewish Center (AMIA) certain circles pointed the finger of blame at Iran, accusing Tehran of having masterminded the attack. The then health minister of the Zionist regime, Ephraim Sneh accused Iran in these words, “Iran is a potential terrorist and AMIA blast resembles the one at the Israeli Embassy.” This occurred 2 years earlier.
Staging of numerous rallies in front of the Iran Islamic Republic Embassy in Buenos Aires, organized by the Zionist regime with the backing of Jewish circles in Argentina and the United States in complete harmony with Western media, had created a poisonous atmosphere against Iran. The Argentinean government was faced, on the one hand with the flood of media reports against Iran, and on the other by efforts of some Argentinean politicians and legal authorities in forging documents and bribing witnesses to give evidence in favor of the Zionist regime, using completely fabricated material as evidence. Such factors led to the concurrence of the Argentinean government with the judiciary in issuing unjust verdicts against Iran and Hezbollah resulting in an almost total break in political, economic, and cultural ties between Iran and Argentina.
Iran’s former ambassador to Argentina, Hadi Soleimanpour was detained on August 21, 2003 in Durham, Britain, where he was studying. A British court held a 51-minute hearing on November 13, 2003 and issued a final verdict acquitting Soleimanpour and declaring the case officially closed.
Following a complaint filed two years later by Iran against the British court for libel and damages, the British government paid 180,000 pounds sterling to cover the costs of the trial.
Therefore, those Zionist who condom Iran and Hezbollah for the bombing must stop repeating Zionist’s rubbish immediately.
Israel has not only whipped the Palestinian off the map but also is trying to divide countries larger than itself in the region through destabilization using American power to implement its expansionist policy.
Zionism and imperialism are both sides of the same coin and fighting against one without the other is not fruitful. Both are exploitative, racist and expand their power and influence through dispossession of others by military means and act of terror. Both believe in their chosenness and their exceptionalism. I believe that Zionism is racism, because in establishing the racially exclusive state of Israel, in 1948, and expelling the indigenous Palestinians from the land, they have done ethnic cleansing of the indigenous population who has lived on their land continually for the past twenty one centuries.

===========
Israel and Palestinians agree to launch peace talks

Tue Nov 27, 2007 11:38 AM EST

By Arshad Mohammed and Sue Pleming

ANNAPOLIS, Md (Reuters) - With a handshake, leaders of the United States, Israel and the Palestinians agreed on Tuesday to immediately launch peace talks with the goal of reaching a final accord by the end of 2008.

President George W. Bush made the dramatic announcement at the opening of a 44-nation Middle East peace conference, with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas standing alongside him.

Bush arranged for a handshake between the two leaders as they stood at the podium of the conference after he announced the agreement whose aim is establishing a Palestinian state that will live in peace with Israel.

The accord emerged from lengthy, last-minute negotiations between the parties on a joint document meant to chart the course for negotiating the toughest “final status” issues of the conflict — Jerusalem, borders, security and the fate of Palestinian refugees.

“We agreed to immediately launch good faith, bilateral negotiations in order to conclude a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including core issues, without exception,” Bush said, reading from a joint statement. He said the two sides agreed to try to reach an agreement by the end of 2008.

I do not claim that one can get to objectivity. However, one cannot claim that an event occurred in 1936, when it occurred in 1938, and then assert that the event wrongly claimed to occur in 1936 influenced what occurred in 1937. Unless cause and effect are thrown out the window, such a claim is called an error.

Frankly, that is what you are defending. So, yes, there is no perfect objectivity. But, the effort to maintain fidelity to events is what distinguishes a scholar from a quack. That is what Morris claims about Pappe. Not that Pappe has details interpreted more one way than Morris would do but, instead, that the idea of even trying to present events in a manner that resembles, to the extent humanely possible what occurred is rejected out of hand in favor of advocacy.

Consider, if one rejects the effort toward maintaining fidelity to events, any narrative is equally true - which, in fact, is what Pappe claims. So, one can say, just as well as Pappe says that Arabs were only wronged, claim that Arabs wanted to leave the area because they thought life in Lebanon and Syria and Jordan would be better. Some, in fact, did so. And, it is a very good subjective narrative. The only way to refute it would be to accept the idea that one must maintain fidelity to events as they occurred.

You, of course, are free to maintain that objectivity is a crock. But, you open yourself up to anyone saying anything.

First of all, “objectivity” does not exist in reality. Even the most well-cited and exhaustive article on any topic ultimately relies on subjective interpretations of events (even first-hand accounts are subjective…even photographs are subjective, because the photographer must make a choice of what to shoot, which is based on their judgment, which is subjective). In addition, the decision of which “facts” to consider relevant to the topic, and hence to include in an article or book, is subjective.

Anyone claiming objectivity is seeking to mask their subjectivity, to pass off an interpretation that supports their agenda as “the facts.” This is often utilized in the mainstream media by pundits attempting to convince people to support policy that is contrary to their interests. For example, you have Bill O’Reilly on Fox News talking about how he’s “fair and balanced” and how his show is “the No Spin Zone.” He does this because his role is to convince working class people to take conservative positions, which are contrary to their economic interests. He can’t say, “I support driving down the wages of all workers, and this can be done by using racism as a weapon of division, which will prevent unionization and will allow bosses to pay employees of color less, keeping all wages down. So: you should discriminate against Blacks and/or Latinos and/or Arabs and/or Muslims.” Instead, he lies, claiming that an objective analysis of the “facts,” shows that undocumented immigrants cause crime, that rap music causes crime, that Islam is inherently violent, etc.

I think it’s a good thing that Pappe, on principle, sides with the oppressed and not the oppressor, whatever “the facts.” The vast majority of people are excluded from day to day politics, so they are not obligated to abide by the code of the elite. The Palestinians suffering at the hands of Israel, the children having their limbs blown off by Israeli cluster bomblets to this day in Lebanon, the thousands being tortured in Israeli dungeoins: they never signed a statement saying that “might makes right,” that just because Israel was able to drive their ancestors from their land (or, as many Zionists, in a characteristically racist manner, interpret “the facts” in an “objective” manner, left, all for the same reasons, because of course the “Arab mind” is one) they must accept this reality, that they must live as second-class citizens.

Whenever a human being thinks, speaks, or writes, the result is subjective. This is unavoidable; we all have a perspective, a class interest, an interpretation, and a unique set of information we see as “the facts.” The most honest among us are open about this subjectivity. They put their agenda out there. In a world where it’s possible to meet the needs of everyone, where there is no need for oppression or exploitation, those who oppose oppression and exploitation on a principled basis, no matter the color/religion/ethnic origin/status of the oppressors or oppressed, are subjective, yes, but in the best possible way.

Note that you did not answer my question. Do you or do you not condemn the Arab effort to ethnically cleanse what became Israel? That is a Yes or a No.

Zionism is not an aberration. It is “modern” day version of colonialism; and it is firmly entrenched in ideology. Israel is not an empire unto itself, but instead feeds off the ideology of Western imperialism most strikingly expressed in US policies.

It uses the power of the “conqueror” to alter the story (history) to justify morally unjustifable acts; and has found a tool - a moral imperative not unlike American exceptionalism/manifest destiny - called Holocaust to thrust around like a giant sword at anything that gets in its way or needs “convincing”.

You might tell that to American nonwhites who have 1,000s of racially defined organizations here, 1,000s of racially defined leaders, and all discriminate based upon … race.

Deadbeat wrote:
“Race is a false construction and concept used to divide people and justify the OPPRESSION of certain groups over others.”

Our species is a predatory species, which means we are tribe oriented, hierachal, and territorial.

Regardless of the word you use to define this, it is true, and we see omnipresent tribal behavior on the planet.

Deadbeat wrote:
“Races was needed to justify capitalist oppression of Africans during the slave trade.”

Our species has been enslaving each other since we stepped foot in the mud, and Africans still enslave each other. According to a report written by Senator Lieberman, there are 5 African countries that still keep slavess.

Deadbeat wrote:
“Zionism is the excuse being used to justify the oppression and ethic cleansing of Palestinians.”

Zionism is human collectivism, which all racial families engage in if they are normal and healthy.

Trolls need a special low-content diet. Please, please, those of you who feed the trolls–you know who you are–don’t!

Here’s something to unwind with. For Breyton Breytenbach substitute Daniel Barenboim.

As I have said, I am not interested in the Zionist tactic of ad hominem. To me, it clearly exposes how utterly inept and vacuous their position is.

Selectively quoting from Pappe means little. Pappe also said: “Indeed the struggle is about ideology, not about facts, Who knows what facts are? We try to convince as many people as we can that our interpretation of the facts is the correct one, and we do it because of ideological reasons, not because we are truthseekers.” — interview with Le Soir, Nov. 29, 1999. [source]

Focusing on a personality is a distraction.

And, do you really hold that an attempt to undo an “ethnic cleansing” against one’s own people makes the victims of ethnic cleansing ethnic cleansers?

Dr. Israel Shahak put it well in “The Racist Nature of Zionism and of the Zionist State”: “It is my considered opinion that the State of Israel is a racist state in the full meaning of this term. In this state people are discriminated against in the most permanent and legal way and in the most important areas of life only because of their origin. This racist discrimination began in Zionism and is carried out today mainly in cooperation with the institution of the Zionist movement. I do not wish to debate any justification for the racist policy. The most important fact is that it exists. Therefore the first step consists in admitting the truth: The State of Israel is a racist state, and its racism is a necessary consequence of the racism of the Zionist Movement. Facts are facts. After this we can debate, if we wish to do so, why such a racism is ‘forbidden’ against the Jews and becomes a good deed when it is carried out by the Jews.”

****

Thanks Mohammad.

I haven’t read Pappe. But I have read Morris and his conclusions do refute Kay’s assertion that Palestinians left Israel voluntarily.

Now you clearly did not read the comment posted by me. What I said is that Pappe, on his own theory - not my theory -, does not take facts as centrally important. Rather, he, not I, takes the view that, because the Arab side lost, he is on their side, facts be damned.

Pappe’s exact words are:

my [pro-Palestinian] bias is apparent despite the desire of my peers that I stick to facts and the ‘truth’ when reconstructing past realities. I view any such construction as vain and presumptuous. This book is written by one who admits compassion for the colonized not the colonizer; who sympathizes with the occupied not the occupiers; and sides with the workers not the bosses. He feels for women in distress, and has little admiration for men in command…. Mine is a subjective approach….

Note: he refuses to stick to facts. He prefers, as he says, a subjective approach. In other words, he does not care whether or not something is true. He cares about his politics, not what occurred.

In Arab discourse, the Nakba refers to the failure of Arabs to win the 1948 war, a war which they described, before it began, as a chance to drive off the entire Jewish population. That, you will note, is a view that appears consistently in Arab books on the topic. It is not my subjective view. It is the most common Arab view. It, by the way, remains the most common Arab view.

Now: do you have any facts that say my facts are wrong.

I do not deny that Arabs lost their homes. I note, however, that the actual context includes their effort to ethnically cleanse the Jewish population. I would throw back in your face: ARE YOU A PERSON WHO DENIES THE ARAB EFFORT TO ETHNICALLY CLEANSE OR KILL OFF THE JEWISH POPULATION OF WHAT IS NOW ISRAEL?

Of course one should read widely from various sources and appraise the information accordingly. What you offer is your personal opinion on Pappe. I’m utterly uninterested in this. I am interested in the facts. Morris attests to the dispossession of the Palestinians. This is a fact that I am interested in. What Morris thinks of Pappe is of no interest.

You have mentioned some unreferenced “facts” that amount to irrelevant quibbling.

Firm conclusions about the Arab Israeli conflict can be had from myriad sources, Pappe being just one of them. Your tendentious comments do not carry any credibility until you admit to the Nakba and the crimes against Palestinians. You prefer, however, to provide cover for Zionists, although you will deny it, it is patently obvious.

Mike McNiven,

Thanks for your comments. However, I fail to see how what I have written differs from what you say.

“[Hezbollah] was begun by a Shi’ite cleric after the important events which changed the Middle East: the Israeli invasion of Lebanon (1978) and the Iran Revolution (1979).

In 1984, two years after the massacre at Sabra and Shatila and the arrival of 1500 revolutionary Iranian guards, the Party of God was formed.”

Also, INTERPOL does not say that the AMAI bombing was “done by the Hezbollah of Iran.” It has merely “decided to endorse and adopt the conclusions of the report prepared by INTERPOL’s Office of Legal Affairs that Red Notices should be issued for the following six individuals: Imad Fayez Mughniyah, Ali Fallahijan, Mohsen Rabbani, Ahmad Reza Asghari, Ahmad Vahidi and Mohsen Rezai.

Sorry Jaime,

The two concepts are tied, as much as you imagine them to not be so. You are a self-professed Nakba-denier. This puts you in similar ideological company with Mr Zundel and Mr Irving.

Playing games with the date of an “ethnic cleansing”is diversionary. Primary is whether it happened or not. When is secondary.

But clearly, the comments here indicate that people can cut through the fallacious subterfuge from Zionist commenters.

You cite from a biased source which does not employ the thing that helps to understand events: CONTEXT. The Israelis have good reason to fear the Arab population. Why? Read what the Hamas Covenant says. I trust you know the part of it which calls for the genocide of all Jews. Must I quote it for you. And, unlike your ben Gurion quote, mine will be in context.