 By Douglas Farah The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report broke the story that the U.S. State Department has lifted Tariq Ramadan's ban from entering the United States. Ramadan , an influential European leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, was long banned because of alleged ties to terrorist activity. The lifting of the ban, ordered by Secretary of State Clinton, is a significant victory for the Brotherhood, who has sought to frame the issue of Ramadan's exclusion as one of academic freedom rather one of national security. Ramadan was ecstatic, saying on his blog: Today’s decision reflects the Obama administration’s willingness to reopen the United States to the rest of the world, and to permit critical debate. Coming after nearly six years of inquiry and investigation, Secretary Clinton’s order confirms what I have affirmed and reaffirmed from day one: the first accusations of terrorist connections (subsequently dropped), then donations to Palestinian solidarity groups, were nothing more than a pretense to prohibit me from speaking critically about American government policy on American soil. The decision brings to an end a dark period in American politics that saw security considerations invoked to block critical debate through a policy of exclusion and baseless allegation. Today I am delighted at the decision. The truth of the grandson of Hassan al Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, is far more complex, and there is little doubt that, in the end, he is an agent of radicalization rather than peace. A rock star in the European Muslim scene, Ramadan, despite weak academic credentials, has been offered a teaching position at Notre Dame University. As noted in this extensive review of Brother Tarik: The Doublespeak of Tarik Ramadan by French journalist Caroline Fourest, the definitive look at Ramadan's cannon, he is intent on saying one thing to Western audiences while something else to his followers. They often do not match up. This is typical of the Muslim Brotherhood. It is eager to use the freedoms that would never exist under the caliphate is so desires to create, in order to promote its totalitarian vision.
It demands the right to be heard while being unequivocal in its unwillingness to view as equal anyone who does not embrace its view radical Islamism. While it is willing to use the democratic process to achieve its goals, often putting it at odds with militantly violent groups such as al Qaeda, in the end the Brotherhood and Osama bin Laden share an identical vision of what the world should look like under Allah's rule.
My full blog is here. Counterterrorism Blog
 The United States said on Monday it had begun discussing with other countries fresh sanctions to try to pressure Iran's government and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to curb Tehran's nuclear programs. "We have already begun discussions with our partners and with like-minded nations about pressure and sanctions," US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said at a news conference with Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani. "Our goal is to pressure the Iranian government, particularly the Revolutionary Guard elements, without contributing to the suffering of the ordinary (people), who deserve better than what they currently are receiving," she added. Clinton said the United States, which accuses Iran of secretly pursuing nuclear arms under the cover of its civil nuclear program, will continue its "dual-track" approach of seeking an end to the program through negotiations while also considering sanctions as a way to change Tehran's policy. Iran has rebuffed the West's year-end deadline to accept an enrichment fuel deal aimed at quelling international fears it is trying to build nuclear weapons, something Clinton said disappointed the Obama administration. She also said Washington was "disturbed by the mounting signs of ruthless repression" that the Iranian authorities have shown in cracking down on protests against the leadership since a disputed election in June. YNet 
 Danish media say the man who attacked an artist who depicted the Prophet Muhammad in a cartoon has previously been arrested in Kenya. The Politiken newspaper reported Sunday that Danish intelligence knew the 28-year-old Somali man was held in Kenya in September for allegedly plotting an attack against US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Citing unnamed sources, the newspaper said he was later released due to lack of evidence.
But Denmark's ambassador to Kenya, Bo Jensen, told the news agency Ritzau the man was arrested in Kenya for incomplete travel documents.
He said Kenyan authorities never told the embassy he was suspected in any terror plot. Denmark's PET intelligence agency would not comment. The armed suspect was charged with attempted murder Saturday after breaking into artist Kurt Westergaard's home.
 Some 25 countries involved in the US-led operation in Afghanistan have pledged to send an additional 7,000 troops, the Nato secretary-general has confirmed, meeting US expectations for added support. "At least 25 countries will send more forces to the mission in 2010," Anders Fogh Rasmussen said after a meeting with the military alliance and non-Nato members in Brussels on Friday. He did not name the nations pledging troops, but said further contributions from other allies could be made "in the coming weeks and months". "There is no doubt the going will be tough, no one should expect instant results. But it will not be a run for the exit," he said. His comments come after Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, said she was confident allies would support calls by Washington for more troops in Afghanistan.
Barack Obama, the US president, had called on other countries to come up with 5,000 to 7,000 troops to bolster an additional 30,000 forces from the US. Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, is spending Friday explaining US plans to step up the campaign against the Taliban. "There's an understanding about the importance of the mission that the president has described," she said before arriving at Friday's meeting, adding that the "response has been positive". Rasmussen said the coming year will bring "new momentum" to the Afghanistan mission, he said during a talk with Nato foreign ministers in Brussels. There are currently around 100,000 troops from 43 countries involved in the US-led operation in Afghanistan. David Miliband, the British foreign secretary - whose country has so far committed an additional 500 troops - said alliance members must "ask themselves whether they are doing the maximum possible". "We know the stakes are very high indeed. So this is the time for all of the international community to make sure it steps up to support the efforts of governance in Afghanistan and Pakistan to ensure stability in that crucial part of the world." Italy's government has approved sending 1,000 extra soldiers to Afghanistan next year, the defence and foreign ministers announced on Thursday. In addition to Italy, Britain, Georgia, Poland and Slovakia have all promised increased troop deployments, while key allies France and Germany appear to be leaning more toward providing trainers for Afghan forces. But the Netherlands and Canada plan to withdraw their respective combat forces of 2,100 and 2,800 over the next two years, reflecting public unease with the war. The US now has 71,000 troops in Afghanistan, while other Nato members and allies collectively have 38,000 service members there. With the added reinforcements, the international forces will swell to more than 140,000 soldiers. Clinton said the United States was seeking a range of help, including civilian assistance and military training, in order to prepare Afghanistan to take charge of its own destiny. "We've got to bring the Afghan security forces into the fight," she said. Al Jazeera
 By Aaron Klein JERUSALEM – A member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud Party today slammed as "racist" President Obama's longstanding demand for a halt to Jewish construction in the strategic West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem. "President Obama should not interfere with the rights of the Jewish people to live in Jerusalem," said Likud Knesset Member Danny Danon.
"This ... is a racist demand, saying that Jews cannot live in Jerusalem, only Arabs." Danon continued: "Our duty is to the nation that chose to deepen the settlement across Judea and Samaria, and of course Jerusalem. We will fulfill that duty, even at the cost of ignoring Obama and his advisers." The Knesset member was speaking at a groundbreaking ceremony initiating 124 new apartments in a Jewish housing complex in the eastern section of Jerusalem. In a separate statement, he told WND "the answer to Obama's racist request not to permit Jewish building in Jerusalem was given today when we initiated the construction of another Jewish neighborhood in Nof Zion (eastern Jerusalem)." "The people in Israel are united behind Netanyahu's position regarding eternal rights of Jews to build and live in Jerusalem," he added. Danon's strong words came shortly after Obama stated in a Fox News interview today that settlement activity in Jerusalem and the West Bank complicated efforts by his administration to re-launch Israeli-Palestinian negotiations while it also embitters the Palestinians. Obama was responding to a plan to build new homes within a Jerusalem neighborhood called Gilo, where already some 40,000 Israelis live. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement that "at a time when we are working to re-launch negotiations, these actions make it more difficult for our efforts to succeed." Netanyahu's office responded to Obama's criticism by dispatching an aide who sent reporters a message calling the building plan in Gilo "a routine process." The aide explained that like other foreign leaders, Netanyahu does not normally review municipal building plans in local neighborhoods. The aide added that Netanyahu saw Gilo as "an integral part of Jerusalem." "Construction in Gilo has taken place regularly for dozens of years and there is nothing new about the current planning and construction," the aide added. Obama had demanded a complete halt to Jewish construction in the strategic West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem, which Netanyahu publicly has refused. Palestinians routinely build in those territories, and at times the construction takes place illegally on Jewish-owned land. Earlier this month, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in Jerusalem that a settlement freeze should not be a precondition for re-launching stalled talks with the Palestinians.
However, WND reported the Palestinian Authority rejected a proposal by Clinton for Israel to largely scale back Jewish construction in exchange for the resumption of talks. WND
 A top State Department official spelled out on Tuesday that the goal of the United States in its negotiations in the Middle East is to pressure Israel into expelling Jews from Judea and Samaria in order to "end the occupation that began in 1967." William J. Burns, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, said in his address to the Middle East Institute Tuesday that he sees the U.S.mandate as one of "determined leadership" and that American must be straightforward about its intentions.
"Our goal in the region is clear," he said, "two states living side by side in peace and security; a Jewish state of Israel, with which America retains unbreakable bonds, and with true security for all Israelis; and a viable, independent Palestinian state with contiguous territory that ends the occupation that began in 1967, that ends the daily humiliations of Palestinians under occupation, and that realizes the full and remarkable potential of the Palestinian people." Although he made no mention of any demands upon the PA in order to achieve its goal of establishing a new Arab state within Israel's current borders, Burns was blunt about America's expectations of Israel. "We do not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements; we consider the Israeli offer to restrain settlement activity to be a potentially important step, but it obviously falls short of the continuing Roadmap obligation for a full settlement freeze," he said. Further, he said, "We seek to deepen international support for the Palestinian Authority’s impressive plan to build over the next couple years the institutions that a responsible Palestinian state requires. And we also seek progress toward peace between Israel and Syria, and Israel and Lebanon, as part of a broader peace among Israel and all of its neighbors." The highest ranking Foreign Service Officer in the United States, Burns served as Acting Secretary of State until the appointment of Hillary Rodham Clinton. He was the U.S. Ambassador to Jordan from 1998 to 2001, and as U.S. Ambassador to Russia from 2005 to 2008. The Under Secretary's remarks came barely 24 hours after Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu met at the White House with President Barack Obama for talks grudgingly scheduled just hours before he flew to the U.S. on Sunday. The two leaders were accompanied for some of the one hour and 40-minute meeting, held Monday night, by their respective administrative and security teams. On the agenda were the issues of the Iranian nuclear threat, the paralysis in Israel's negotiations with the PA, and the claim by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas that he will not run again for the leadership in PA elections on January 24. Burns vowed the U.S. "will continue to work hard to bring about the early resumption of negotiations, which is the only path to the two state solution on which so much depends, not only for the future of Israelis and Palestinians, but for the entire Middle East." "We have made limited headway," he claimed, " a shared understanding between the parties about a two-state objective; a shared interest in moving back to the negotiating table; wide international backing for this process; steady progress, in the face of very difficult odds, toward shaping reliable Palestinian security organizations and governmental institutions in the West Bank. Now we need to bear down, move ahead, fulfill our responsibilities for leadership, and challenge every other party to fulfill theirs." Source: INN
 Can anything else possibly go wrong for the Obama administration's Middle East policy?
In the past ten days, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has twice reversed herself publicly on her attitude toward the Israeli settlements.
Palestinians have refused her direct request to rejoin peace talks with Israel, and Palestinian Authority president Abbas has said he will not run for reelection. U.S.-Israel relations are in a state of frozen mistrust. The New York Times and Washington Post, among others, are calling Obama's policy a complete failure--in news stories as well as editorials. The only thing missing is a plague of locusts. The policy is indeed a complete failure.
In ten months the administration has managed to offend and demoralize Israelis and Palestinians, lose the support of Arab governments, and reduce previously excellent relations with the government of Israel to levels unmatched since the James Baker days. Meanwhile, George Mitchell's trips to the region are increasingly reminiscent of the Colin Powell visits in 2002 and 2003--producing little but embarrassment. The Israeli "100 percent settlement freeze" and the Arab outreach to Israel, early goals of the Obama team, are now forgotten, as is an early resumption of serious Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. These disasters are mostly the product of an ignorant and belligerent attitude toward Israel and especially its prime minister. The ignorance was most evident in the administration's view that a total construction freeze could be imposed not only in every settlement but in Jerusalem itself. But the U.S. policy was worse: We demanded a freeze that would apply to construction by Jews, but not by Arabs; could any Israeli leader be expected to support such a position?
One does not need to be a member of the Knesset to understand that such a freeze was impossible for Benjamin Netanyahu and his coalition as it would have been for any Israeli prime minister--but apparently this fact was beyond the understanding of Mitchell, Rahm Emanuel, and all the other "experts" on the Obama team. The belligerence toward Netanyahu has been evident all along, but is best shown by the refusal to tell Israel's prime minister whether or not the president will see him this coming week when Netanyahu (like the president) addresses the United Jewish Communities annual general assembly in Washington. The Israelis gave the White House weeks of notice that Netanyahu had agreed to speak, would be in town, and hoped to see Obama. The White House reaction has been to keep him twisting in the wind, with news stories several days before his arrival saying the president had not decided yet whether to see Netanyahu. Think of it: Our closest ally in the region, critical issues at stake (from Iran's nuclear program and the recent Israeli seizure of an Iranian arms shipment meant for Hezbollah to Abbas's announcement), yet the Israelis get no answer. Obama and his "experts" may think they are reminding Netanyahu who is boss, but they are in fact reminding all of us why Israelis no longer trust Obama--and making closer cooperation between the two governments that much harder. Read more here,,,, Source: Weekly Standard
 A senior Iranian prosecutor accused three Americans detained on the border with Iraq of espionage on Monday, the first signal that Tehran intends to put them on trial. US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called for the release of the three. The announcement came as Washington and Tehran are maneuvering over a deadlock in negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. "We believe strongly that there is no evidence to support any charge whatsoever," Clinton told reporters in Berlin. "And we would renew our request on behalf of these three young people and their families that the Iranian government exercise compassion and release them, so they can return home." Clinton said the US would continue to make that case through the Swiss channels who represent US interests in Tehran. Shane Bauer, Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal, all graduates of the University of California, Berkeley, were arrested July 31 after straying over the Iranian border from northern Iraq. The US government and their families say there were on a hiking vacation and crossed accidentally. Tehran chief prosecutor Abbas Jafari Dowlatabadi says the three "have been accused of espionage" and that investigations were continuing, according to the state news agency IRNA. He said an "opinion (on their case) will be given in the not distant future." It is not clear from his comments whether formal charges had been made, but such announcements are often a sign that charges are imminent if not already filed. In Iran's opaque judicial system, the process of indictment and trial often takes place behind closed doors. The timing of the announcement raised the possibility that Iran was using the case to pressure the United States amid the negotiations over its nuclear program.
Iran is also holding another American, academic Kian Tajbakhsh, who was arrested amid Iran's postelection turmoil and was sentenced last month to 12 years in prison for an alleged role in opposition protests. In January, Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi was arrested in Tehran, was convicted of espionage, then released on appeal in May. Two months later, US forces in Iraq freed five Iranians who they had been holding for months. Source: YNet
 US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton defended the US stance toward Israeli settlement building to worried Arab allies on Wednesday, saying Washington does not accept the legitimacy of the West Bank enclaves and wants to see their construction halted "forever." Still, she said an Israeli offer to restrain - but not halt - construction represents "positive movement forward" toward resuming Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Clinton met for an hour with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak during a hastily arranged stopover in the Egyptian capital to soothe Arab concerns that Washington is backing off demands for an Israeli settlement halt.
The fears were sparked on Saturday when Clinton, with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu at her side in Jerusalem, praised his government's offer as unprecedented. She has since tried to clarify the remarks, saying that the Israeli offer does not got far enough.
Still, she has indicated that the Palestinians should resume negotiations with Israel without a full settlement halt as they demand. On Wednesday, Clinton insisted "our policy on settlement has not changed." "We do not accept the legitimacy of settlement activity. Ending all settlement activity current and future would be preferable," she told reporters after talks with Mubarak. Of the Israeli offer, she said, "It is not what we would prefer because we would like to see everything ended forever." "But it is something that I think shows at least a positive movement forward toward final status issues being addressed," she said. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is sticking to his refusal to resume negotiations until Israel stops building settlements. He rejected the Israeli plan to complete 3,000 housing units in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and to continue to construct public buildings and other construction in east Jerusalem - a territory Palestinians hope will be their future capital. After Arab criticism of her comments in Jerusalem on the Israeli plan, Clinton delayed her return to Washington after attending an international conference in Marrakech, Morocco, and flew instead to Cairo. Read more here,,,, Source: JPost
 by Khaled Abu ToamehEven if Israel were to freeze all construction in the West Bank settlements, this would not mean that peace would prevail in the Middle East the following day.
Those who think that Palestinians would take to the streets to express their joy over such a move are living on a different planet and have a short memory.
In the summer of 2005, when Israel destroyed all settlements in the Gaza Strip and evicted more than 8,000 Jews from their homes, not a single Palestinian welcomed the Israeli pullout.
Neither Fatah nor Hamas saw the Israeli withdrawal as a goodwill gesture that could pave the way for making peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
On the contrary, many Palestinians interpreted the withdrawal as a sign of weakness, attributing to the wave of suicide bombings and rocket attacks against Israel. Now the Palestinian Authority is saying that it won’t return to the negotiating table unless Israel halts all construction in the settlements.
The Palestinian Authority is trying to create the impression that had it not been for the continued construction, peace would have come to the region a long time ago.
This argument, of course, is untrue -- otherwise, peace would have prevailed after Israel destroyed the settlements in the Gaza Strip.
And was there peace between Jews and Arabs before the settlements started popping up after 1967? The Palestinian Authority’s entire approach toward the issue of settlements has been characterized by hypocrisy from the beginning.
If the issue of the settlements were so important, as the Palestinian leadership claims, why didn’t Yasser Arafat and his advisors sign the Oslo Accords more than fifteen years ago without demanding that Israel first halt construction of new homes in the settlements?
And why didn’t Arafat back then insist that Israel freeze all settlement construction as a precondition for talking to Prime Ministers Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Binyamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon while the bulldozers were working? Why, also, did Arafat's successor, Mahmoud Abbas, continue the peace talks with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni without demanding any freeze in settlement construction?
It is interesting that Abbas finally discovered the “threat” of the settlements only after US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton started putting pressure on Israel about the continued construction.
Only after Obama and Clinton made a big issue out of the settlements did Abbas come up with his new demand: that Israel freeze all settlement construction as a precondition for resuming the peace process.
 THE Obama administration's quest to restart Middle East peace talks looks increasingly doomed after the influential Arab League yesterday said there was a sense of failure around the US efforts. Secretary-General of the Arab League Amr Moussa said "failure is in the atmosphere" following Israel's refusal to bow to calls from Washington to halt growth in Jewish settlements in the West Bank. His comment was made in Morocco during a visit by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who sought before an Arab audience to soften her weekend praise of Israel that the Netanyahu government had made an "unprecedented" effort by agreeing to a temporary halt to new settlements. While Israel is prepared to resume peace talks, Palestinian leaders insist they will not unless there is a complete freeze of settlements. Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said yesterday Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas had restated this to US Middle East envoy George Mitchell. "We do not put conditions for resuming negotiations, but we want the talks resumed on the basis of the provisions of the road map, which stipulates the cessation of all forms of settlement activity in the Palestinian territories," Mr Erekat said. Mrs Clinton's "unprecedented" comment in praise of Israel led to a backlash in the Arab world, which she tried to address yesterday. Earlier this year, US President Barack Obama and Mrs Clinton repeatedly stated that the US wanted Israel to halt all settlement activity. Israel refused to do this, saying such a policy would prevent "natural growth" of the settlements in which about 300,000 Jewish people live. The US has now clearly accepted that Israel will not agree to their request and is trying to salvage the peace process by crafting a new deal under which Israel will agree to a moratorium -- most likely for nine months -- to new settlement activity apart from 3000 new housing units already approved. Without the support of the bulk of the 22 Arab and Muslim countries in the Middle East, any peace agreement with Israel, which would give Israel landing rights and normalised relations with most of these countries, would be unlikely to hold. Mrs Clinton said yesterday: "The Obama administration's position on settlements is clear, unequivocal and it has not changed. "As the President has said on many occasions, the US does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements." While the Israeli offer of a temporary halt to new settlements "falls far short of what we would characterise as our position or what our preference would be", she said she would support any moves towards a two-state solution. "I will offer positive reinforcement to either of the parties when I believe they are taking steps that support the objective reaching a two-state solution," she said. Clearly seeking to appear to all sides to be balanced, Mrs Clinton yesterday used the same word -- unprecedented -- to praise the Palestinian Authority for improved security in the West Bank. But her balancing act does not appear to be working: Mr Abbas is under enormous pressure from his own ranks to refuse negotiations with Israel without a freeze on settlements. Since Mr Obama first called for a halt to building activity in the West Bank, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has announced Israel will proceed with 3000 new houses that had already been approved. Both major Palestinian factions -- Mr Abbas's Fatah faction and the militant Hamas faction that runs the Gaza Strip -- are strongly opposed to any talks without a freeze on settlements. Source: The Australian
 Palestinian leaders angrily dismissed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's praise for Israel on Sunday, openly questioning her ability to jumpstart peace talks just hours after she left Israel. Clinton had called Israel's position on settlements "unprecedented" during a news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat rejected her comment Sunday in a strongly worded statement. "What the Israelis are offering is not unprecedented," he said. "What would be unprecedented is a comprehensive settlement freeze by Israel... and a halt to Israeli policies in occupied East Jerusalem such as home demolitions, evictions and rapid settlement expansion." The debate is over Israeli construction on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank and predominantly Palestinian East Jerusalem. "Without a settlement freeze and the eventual dismantlement of settlements, there will be no Palestinian state to negotiate and no two-state solution left to speak of," Erakat said. Clinton on Saturday praised Israel for "restraint" in its settlement policy, but Erakat said that did not go far enough. "If America cannot get Israel to implement a settlement freeze, what chance do Palestinians have of reaching agreement with Israel on permanent status issues," he asked. He said Israel's position on settlements was nothing "other than a failure of Israel to implement a comprehensive settlement freeze as it is required to do under the 2003 road map. Since 2003, the settler population in the West Bank has increased by 73,000 settlers or 17 percent." Netanyahu said Sunday he hoped peace talks would resume soon. Read more here,,,, Source: CNN
 A halt on settlement construction in the West Bank is not a pre-condition for the resumption of talks between Israel and the Palestinians, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Saturday. "There has never been a pre-condition. It's always been an issue within the negotiations," Clinton said about the settlements. Speaking at a joint press conference ahead of her meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Clinton said that she was eager to see the sides embarking on talks, but added that a settlement freeze was not a pre-condition for negotiations. "I want to see both sides as soon as possible begin in negotiations," said Clinton. "Both president Obama and I are committed to a comprehensive peace agreement." "I think where we are right now is to try to get into negotiations. The prime minister will be able to present his government's proposal about what they are doing regarding settlements, which I think when fully explained will be seen as being not only unprecedented, but in response to many of the concerns that have been expressed," she said. Meanwhile, PM Netanyahu said that Israel is interested in progressing on the peace front vis-Ã -vis the Palestinians, and also in respect to regional peace. Israel is willing to embark on peace talks immediately, he said. Responding to Clinton's remarks, a Palestinian official said Israel must halt settlement building for peace talks to resume. Nabil Abu Rdainah, spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said: "A settlement freeze and acknowledging the terms of reference is the only way towards peace negotiations." He added: "Settlement is illegitimate and it is not possible to accept any justification for the continuation of the settlement activity or to defend it in the lands occupied in 1967, including Jerusalem." The Palestinian Authority is aiming to prevent negotiations with Israel, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman charged earlier Saturday in his meeting with Clinton. Lieberman especially criticized the Palestinians for presenting pre-conditions for the resumption of talks, noting that the PA did not make such stipulations in their dealings with the Olmert, Barak, and Sharon governments in recent years. The foreign minister also told Clinton that he recommended, in a talk with Netanyahu, not to embark on negotiations with the Palestinians as long as they continue their incitement over the Goldstone Report and insist on bringing the matter up with the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Earlier in the day, the top State Department official met with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. The Palestinians, however, rejected her request to resume talks with the Jewish State based on understandings reached between the US and Israel.
 Pakistan is once again on the receiving end of violence and militant intimidation. Wednesday's attacks were among the country's deadliest. A car bomb tore through a crowded market full of women's clothing shops and general market stalls in Peshawar, killing 95 people. The explosion came about three hours after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Islamabad, just 100 miles away. Tensions have soared across Pakistan following a spike in Taliban-mediated violence killing more than 240 people this month alone. Peshawar, a gateway to the northwest tribal belt where the Pakistani Army is on a major offensive against Taliban militants, is a perpetual target for violence. But now, as the line between military and civilian targets blurs, the bloodshed has shaken even the most resilient Pakistanis. It has shattered any illusion that the Pakistani army is successfully quashing the Taliban. And if Wednesday's strikes tell us anything, it is that there is much more violence to come. Pakistan is at war, and civilians are no longer immune. The recent string of bloody attacks began on October 12, when a suicide car bombing targeting Pakistani troops killed 41 people in a market in northwest Shangla district, a Pashto-speaking area in the Swat Valley. The Pakistani army claimed it had retaken the area from militants, but the bombing proved otherwise. Two weeks later, a suicide bomber blew himself up inside a U.N. aid agency in Islamabad, killing five staffers. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack and warned of more violence unless the army ended its current offensive in the tribal areas of South Waziristan. It made good on its promise on October 10 when militants raided the army headquarters in the city of Rawalpindi.
Military spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas said during a press conference in Rawalpindi that the attacks were meant to force the government to "reconsider its decision to go after the Taliban in their heartland on the Afghan border." Now, the Taliban are threatening to unleash an even grander assault. "The more Taliban feel hemmed in by the Pakistani military presence around South Waziristan, where the Taliban has strongholds, the more they fight back like cornered animals," explains Haroon Rashid of BBC Urdu. Read more here,,,, Source: Foreign Policy
 LAHORE, Pakistan — U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Thursday that Pakistan had little choice but to take a more aggressive approach, starting last summer, to combatting Taliban and other extremist forces that threaten to destabilize the country. In a lively give-and-take with students at the Government College of Lahore, Clinton said inaction by the government would have amounted to ceding ground to terrorists. "If you want to see your territory shrink, that's your choice," she said, adding that she believed it would be a bad choice. Clinton met with the students on the second day of a three-day visit to Pakistan, her first as secretary of state.
Shortly after she arrived in Islamabad on Wednesday, a car bomb exploded in a market crowded with women and children in Peshawar, killing 105. It was the deadliest attack in Pakistan since 2007. Clinton's visit is designed to get maximum public exposure to improve America's image in a country where many people dislike and distrust the United States. As a way of repudiating past U.S. policies toward Pakistan, Clinton told the students "there is a huge difference" between the Obama administration's approach and that of former President George W. Bush. "I spent my entire eight years in the Senate opposing him," she said to a burst of applause from the audience of several hundred students. "So, to me, it's like daylight and dark." Clinton likened Pakistan's situation — with Taliban forces taking over substantial swaths of land in the Swat valley and in areas along the Afghan border — to a theoretical advance of terrorists into the United States from across the Canadian border.
It would be unthinkable, she said, for the U.S. government to decide, "Let them have Washington (state)" first, then Montana, then the sparsely populated Dakotas, because those states are far from the major centers of population and power on the East Coast. Clinton was responding to a student who suggested that Washington was forcing Pakistan to use military force on its own territory. It was one of several questions from the students that raised doubts about the relationship between the United States and Pakistan. During her hour-long appearance at the college, Clinton stressed that a key purpose of her three-day visit to Pakistan, which began Wednesday, was to reach out to ordinary Pakistanis and urge a better effort to bridge differences and improve mutual understanding. "We are now at a point where we can chart a different course," she said, referring to past differences over an absence of democracy in Pakistan and Pakistani association with the Taliban in Afghanistan. Although Clinton said she was making a priority of engaging frankly and openly on her visit, she declined to talk about a subject that has stirred some of the strongest feelings of anti-Americanism here — U.S. drone aircraft attacks against extremist targets on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border.
The Obama administration routinely refuses to acknowledge publicly that the attacks are taking place. "There is a war going on," she said, and the U.S. wants to help Pakistan be successful. The drone attacks have killed a number of Pakistani civilians, while also reportedly succeeding in eliminating some high-level Taliban and other extremist group leaders. Before flying to Lahore from Islamabad, Clinton visited the Bari Imam shrine, named after Shah Abdul Latif Kazmi, a 17th century Sufi saint who died in 1705 and later came to be known as the patron saint of Islamabad. A suicide bomber struck the shrine in May 2005, killing a number of people. Source: AP
 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton pledged U.S. support for Islamabad's campaign against Islamic militants, after a car bomb struck a busy market in northwestern Pakistan on Wednesday, killing 100 people, most of whom were women and children. "I strongly condemn the cowardly attack today in Afghanistan," Clinton said. "My thoughts and prayers are with all those who were injured and the families who lost loved ones." More than 200 people were wounded in the blast in the main northwestern city of Peshawar, the deadliest in a surge of attacks by suspected insurgents this month. The government blamed militants seeking to avenge an army offensive launched this month against Al Qaeda and Taliban in their stronghold close to the Afghan border. The bombing was the deadliest since explosions hit homecoming festivities for former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in Karachi in October 2007, killing about 150 people. Bhutto was later slain in a separate attack. Wednesday's bomb destroyed much of the Mina Bazaar in Peshawar's old town, a warren of narrow alleys clogged with stalls and shops selling dresses, toys and cheap jewelry that drew many female shoppers and children in the conservative city. The blast collapsed buildings, including a mosque, and set scores of shops ablaze. The wounded sat amid burning debris and parts of bodies as a huge plume of gray smoke rose above the city. Crying for help, men tried to pull survivors from beneath wreckage. One man carried away a baby with a bloody face and a group of men rescued a young boy covered in dust, but others found only bodies of the dead. A two-story building collapsed as firefighters doused it with water, triggering more panic. "There was a deafening sound and I was like a blind man for a few minutes," said Mohammad Usman, who was wounded in the shoulder. "I heard women and children crying and started to help others. There was the smell of human flesh in the air." Read more here,,,, Source: FoxNews
 A car bomb has exploded in a crowded market in the northwest Pakistani city of Peshawar, killing at least 57 people, officials have said. A huge blaze erupted after the explosion on Wednesday, which came just hours after Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, arrived in Islamabad, the Pakistani capital, for talks with government officials. "At least 57 people were killed and more than 150 wounded," Zafar Iqbal, a doctor at the main government hospital in Peshawar, said. Witnesses say most of the victims were women doing the daily shopping at the Khyber Bazaar. Inayat Ali Khan, a local journalist at the scene of the blast, said the casualties are increasing. "The smoke is billowing out of the scene and the fire is not yet extinguished," he told Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera's Imran Khan, reporting from Islamabad, said local officials say the car drove into a very narrow and packed market place. "The bomb disposal squad are on the location and are looking for clues on what type of explosive was used," he said. "From there they'll be able to tell what organisation was behind the bomb making, because they'll be able to link it to previous attacks. "This goes to show that the security situation in Pakistan is very delicate as the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, is in Pakistan for the first time." Source: Al Jazeera (English)
 Obama just had the U.S. at the UN consponsor with Egypt a resolution against inciting religious hatred. But apparently his Secretary of State is not on board, or not completely on board. "Clinton Denounces Proposed 'Defamation of Religions' Policies," by Michelle A. Vu for the Christian Post, October 27 U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced strong opposition Monday to proposed U.N. resolutions on "defamation of religions," saying that such policies would restrict free speech. In opening remarks for the release of the State Department's Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, Clinton said that while some claim so-called defamation of religions policies would help protect freedom of religion, she "strongly disagree[s]." "The United States will always seek to counter negative stereotypes of individuals based on their religion and will stand against discrimination and persecution," Clinton stated. "But an individual's ability to practice his or her religion has no bearing on others' freedom of speech." The protection of speech about religion and religious discourse is important in a world with many different faith beliefs, asserted the high-ranking U.S. diplomat. Earlier this year, the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted an anti-defamation draft resolution that human rights groups warn would protect a religion rather than adherents of religions. Leonard A. Leo, chair of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, last week testified to Members of Congress that the only religion and religious adherents that are specifically mentioned in the "defamation" resolutions - this year's and past years - are Islam and Muslims. "Aside from Islam, the resolutions do not specify which religions are deserving of protection, or explain how or by whom this would be determined," Leo stated.... And "defamation of Islam," as we have seen so many times at Jihad Watch, means efforts to resist the jihad and Islamic supremacism -- as far as all too many Muslims are concerned. Source: JihadWatch
 Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks about the 2009 Annual Report on
International Religious Freedom at the State Department in Washington.By Michelle A. Vu U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton voiced strong opposition Monday to proposed U.N. resolutions on “defamation of religions,” saying that such policies would restrict free speech. In opening remarks for the release of the State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom, Clinton said that while some claim so-called defamation of religions policies would help protect freedom of religion, she “strongly disagree[s].” “The United States will always seek to counter negative stereotypes of individuals based on their religion and will stand against discrimination and persecution,” Clinton stated. “But an individual’s ability to practice his or her religion has no bearing on others’ freedom of speech.” The protection of speech about religion and religious discourse is important in a world with many different faith beliefs, asserted the high-ranking U.S. diplomat. Read more ...Source: Christian PostH/T: Jihad WatchSecretary of State Hillary Clinton
Latest recipient of The MASH Award
 By Dick Morris Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has fallen for Iran’s line that it is not developing nuclear weapons, but only wants the ability to develop one to achieve its place in the sun among the great nations of the earth. In an interview on a Sunday show and in a leak in The New York Times that seems to have come from her (since it uses the same language), she notes that “there’s a small space for doubt (about Iran’s intention to build a bomb) because there are some contrary indicators. There is no doubt in my mind that they want nuclear energy and nuclear power, which they are entitled to, to be able to use it for peaceful purposes. The real problem is once you do that and you get what’s called a breakout capacity, it’s not long before you could do the other (build a bomb). So that’s why this is so important to address now.” Pressed to comment on a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that it was clear that Iran was headed toward building a bomb, Hillary demurred. Read more ...Source: FPMHillary Clinton
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
By Douglas Farah 
Posts
