The 20 kg of C-4 explosives - each kilogram was wrapped separately and could have been used to assemble a separate bomb - were smuggled into Israel in a single bag by a number of residents of Ghajar on June 5.
The bag was transferred a few days later to a resident of Nazareth, Abed Zoabi - another known drug dealer - who hid the bag in his backyard where it was captured by the Israel Police in mid July.
"The explosives could have been used against any type of target inside Israel," a senior Shin Bet official said on Wednesday. "This is just the tip of the iceberg of Hezbollah's efforts against Israel...the attempted attack here and the recent attack in Bulgaria are all carried out by the same organization."
The Shin Bet official said that such an operation - to infiltrate explosives into Israel from Lebanon - would have needed approval from the top Hezbollah echelon, including likely from the organization's leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
The official said that it was possible that Hezbollah was working with other people to recruit terrorists who would then be used to carry out the attacks. So far, the Shin Bet has not arrested anyone who was supposed to carry out the actual attacks.
Video: Al-Jazeera talk show degenerates into fistfight
A discussion between Joseph abu Fadil, on the right, a supporter of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and Mohiuddin Allazghani, on the left, an opponent of President Assad degenerates into a fistfight.
The person who posted this in Arabic (obviously an Assad supporter) claims that Allazghani started it by swearing at Abu Fadil.
Israel Radio reports that this show is very popular on al-Jazeera, and that Abu Fadil threatened to kill Allazghani outside al-Jazeera's studios when this show ended.
Let's go to the videotape. More after the videotape.
Israel Radio also reported that the IDF expects Ghajar, the town that's half in Israel and half in Lebanon, and Israel's only Alawite-dominated town, to be overwhelmed with refugees any day now. Assad is a member of the Alawite sect, which makes up 10-12% of the Syrian population.
Lebanese news portal Naharnet is reporting that the IDF has 'infiltrated' the town of Ghajar, which is currently divided between Israel and Lebanon.
An Israeli army unit infiltrated the Lebanese section of the southern village of Ghajar on Friday, accompanied by over flights by its surveillance planes, reported the National News Agency.
The army unit, comprised of foot soldiers and armored vehicles, conducted surveillance operations in the village for about an hour and they also inspected the electronic fence near the area.
The incursion was accompanied by activity from three Merkava tanks along the Israeli side of the Lebanese-Israeli border near the villages of al-Samaqa and Roueis.
Meanwhile, the Israeli fighter jets flew, at medium altitude, over the regions of al-Arqoub, Hasbayya, the western Bekaa, and Iqlim al-Tuffah.
Israeli drones also flew over the occupied Shebaa Farms and nearby areas for over an hour.
An Israeli official has said that a plan to withdraw from the Lebanese side of the occupied border village of Ghajar is now on hold due to recent changes in the region, including Lebanon.
"We don't want to give the Hizbullah government free gifts," the official in Jerusalem told Israel's Ynet news website, hinting that for the time being the plan to withdraw from the northern part of Ghajar has been frozen.
The Israeli security cabinet approved a plan to pull forces out from the Lebanese side of Ghajar around three months ago. Under the plan, Israeli troops were to withdraw from the area and leave it under UNIFIL's authority.
"The idea was to boost the moderates, not the extremists," the official said. "Today it's problematic to hand over Ghajar to the Hizbullah government. We are discussing the matter with the U.N. and UNIFIL. Back in December we couldn't have predicted the current instability and Hizbullah toppling the government."
"Nothing will happen before the Hariri report comes out," the Israeli official said in reference to the indictment that will eventually be made public by the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.
Nothing will happen after the Hariri report comes out either, because it's likely to precipitate a coup by Hezbullah. But then, that was foreseeable three months ago too.
"The people of Ghajar do not want to be part of Lebanon," said Timur Goksel, former senior adviser of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), of the village's 2,200 residents -- none of whom is Lebanese.
"They say they have nothing to do with Lebanon, historically, politically, socially," Goksel told AFP. "If they become Lebanese they are going to lose all their privileges as Israeli citizens."
...
Israeli officials have said responsibility for the sector will be transferred to UNIFIL, whose troops will redeploy around Ghajar's northern perimeter but not inside the village itself.
"The plan is basically to return to the pre-2006 status quo," said Andrew Tabler, a Syria and Lebanon expert at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
"Israel will only patrol south of the Blue Line and Israel's main security fence will run along the village's southern border," Tabler, who was recently in Ghajar, told AFP.
Most Ghajar residents are Syrian Alawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam, who have acquired Israeli citizenship.
They reject the partitioning of their village, which would put 1,700 people in Lebanon and 500 in Israel and possibly leave family members unable to visit each other.
While Hezbollah is demanding that Israel hand over the northern part of Ghajar to the Lebanese army, with UNIFIL backing, experts say the Lebanese military is unlikely to be granted access.
"The (Israeli) security fence running along the northern edge of the village will remain," Tabler said. "The question being worked out now is who will patrol the northern neighbourhood."
The Lebanese government has yet to react officially to Israel's proposed withdrawal, but Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah, arguably the most powerful figure in the country, has rejected the plan.
"The Lebanese part of Ghajar must be returned to Lebanon and the Syrian part, with its residents, must be given to Lebanon until the Syrian-Lebanese border is demarcated," Nasrallah has said.
So if no one is happy about it, why are we going through with it? Why it's the fierce moral urgency of course.
Unless we don't go through with it....
Experts say, however, that Israel's commitment to withdraw from northern Ghajar is unlikely to take place soon.
"It is not going to happen until there is a peace treaty between Syria and Israel, and then Lebanon and Israel, so everyone will cross that bridge when they come to it," Tabler said.
Withdrawing from northern Ghajar won't bring quiet to Lebanese border
Some people think that withdrawing the IDF from the northern half of Ghajar, as the government has voted to do, will bring quiet to our border with Lebanon. But they are wrong. Very, very wrong.
Even if the withdrawal does take place and the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon is deployed there, the Lebanese state will not consider the mission complete until the Lebanese army is deployed in the village, it added.
The withdrawal process first takes place with Israel's pull out, which would be followed by UNIFIL deployment on the same day where it would check that the occupying troops had truly withdrawn from the village.
The following day, the Lebanese army would enter the liberated area, the source continued.
It noted that Israel's withdraw does not mean that it has fulfilled its commitments to international resolutions seeing as it is still obligated to withdraw from the Shabaa Farms and respect Lebanon's sovereignty by ending its daily air, land, and sea violations against Lebanon and dismantling its spy networks in the country.
Funny, Israelis are being told that UNIFIL will deploy in Ghajar and not the Hezbullah-dominated Lebanese Armed Forces.
It is anticipated that once the IDF withdraws into the southern part of the village, UNIFIL would then be stationed along Ghajar’s northern perimeter.
And then there's this:
The source continued, saying that should such a withdrawal take place, "the majority's [the Western-aligned Hariri government] position would be bolstered at the national dialogue, while the opposition [Hizbullah] would have to acknowledge" the government's choice to resort to diplomacy, effectively undermining the legitimacy of Hizbullah's armed presence on the Lebanese-Israeli border.
I doubt Hezbullah will acknowledge anything.
And they're not giving up the 'resistance' either:
Meanwhile, Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berry on Thursday said, "Whether the Israeli move toward Ghajar is considered a political maneuver or delayed awareness of Resolution 1701, which required Israel to withdraw from Lebanese territory in the wake of the July 2006 war, thus the return of every inch of Lebanese territory is the return of the right [land] to its rightful owners," according to Hizbullah's al-Manar.
But Berri added, "Pending a unified Lebanese stance on how to deal with the Israeli move and read the dimensions and timing [of the plan], we will keep echoing the same thing from Ghajar, that the 'Resistance will remain a national need,'" al-Manar reported.
Hizbullah MP Kamel al-Rifai called the planned Israeli withdrawal a move intended "to shift attention and elude the international resolution," referring to UNSC resolution 1701, according to the report.
Here is a response from UNIFIL spokesperson Neeraj Singh to a report that the residents of Ghajar are not happy that the IDF will be withdrawing from the northern half of the town.
Asked about protests against the decision by the town’s residents, he said that “the priority for us is the Israeli army’s withdrawal according to Resolution 1701.”
Aren't you glad UNIFIL cares? Don't you wish everyone did?
The State Department is thrilled that they finally got the evil Joooos to agree to pull out of something, even if it's just the northern half of the Golan Heights town of Ghajar (as expected, the cabinet voted in favor of the pullout on Wednesday). State Department spokesman PJ Crowley put out the following statement.
The United States welcomes the announcement today by Israel’s Security Cabinet that it accepts in principle the proposal offered by the UNIFIL Force Commander, providing for the complete withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Lebanese territory in and around the village of Ghajar. The United States encourages Israel and the UN to complete the technical details necessary to implement this proposal rapidly and thereby protect the rights of the affected civilians and further the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006), which aims for a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.
I'm not even going to talk about the fact that it's not Lebanese territory - it's either Israeli territory or 'occupied' Syrian territory. But the statement about protecting the right of affected civilians cannot be allowed to pass.
Crowly is a moron. (I wanted to add another word before moron, but I try not to publish vulgarity on this blog). As it happens, the 'affected civilians' have been out in the streets demonstrating against the pullout all day yesterday and today. So for whose benefit is this being done? Hezbullah's?
In an earlier post, I mentioned that I had passed on a Wednesday opportunity to gain access to Ghajar, the soon-to-be-divided town on the edge of the Golan Heights that is rarely open to outsiders.
But I did provide you with this quote from the town's spokesman, which I got from a Lebanese website.
Najeeb Khateeb, a spokesman for Ghajar, said his townsmen would have consented to the village being transferred in its entirety to Lebanon as a temporary measure before its ultimate return to Syria. He said he opposed the partition.
“We have no objection that the entire village, with all of its lands, be transferred to Lebanon,” he told The Media Line. “However, we refuse to become landless refugees in Lebanon. We remained here to guard our homes and land, even though 50% of our residents were uprooted in 1967 and now live in Syria. We would rather die here than become refugees.”
I'm sure you'll all be shocked to hear that an Israeli blogger who visited Ghajar on Wednesday was told a completely different story - by the same spokesperson:
Najib Khatib, the spokesman for Ghajar’s local council, was unable to hide his discontent at the fact that no official representative has visited the village to ask what the 2,200 residents want or inform them of decisions which will affect their future.
“We only find out what is going on by way of the media” he said.
Since Israel withdrew from Lebanon, the residents have consistently opposed the division of the village as stipulated by the UN. Najib explained that there are not two halves to the village; it is one community and every resident of it has family members in both the artificially created parts.
“Why put up another Berlin Wall here?” he asked rhetorically, and indeed when one sees where the proposed border would lie, one understands the full absurdity of the UN stipulation.
Most of the agricultural land belonging to the village is situated in the southerly area which means that should the division plan go ahead, the people living today in the northerly part would, according to Najib, find themselves stateless refugees in Lebanon and bereft of their lands. He calls it a “Judgement of Solomon”: a demand to divide something which cannot be divided.
Najib then explained that the village never had any connections with Lebanon, from which it is separated by the natural border of the River Hatzbani. All the old deeds they have for their lands are Syrian and were issued in the Golan Heights town of Kuneitra. The UN mapmakers who drew up the border or “Blue Line” in 2000 relied upon old maps from 1923 created as a result of the Sykes-Picot agreement. As he wryly pointed out, “Those maps were made by the British and the French. There were no Israelis, Lebanese or Syrians then.”
According to Najib, the entire village speaks with one voice on this issue and their position is that they are part of the Golan which was captured by Israel in 1967 and as such, their fate is inextricably linked to that of the Golan as a whole. If a peace agreement is ever signed between Israel and Syria under which the former gives over the Golan, then Ghajar should go back to being a part of Syria. Until then, they wish to remain as they are today: one united village in Israel, with Israeli citizenship.
I have two takeaways for you. First, to whom did Mr. Najib tell the truth? That's hard to say. There are those that argue that these people so fear Syria and Hezbullah that they always hedge their bets and don't say anything against them. I suppose that's true in this case as well. Even what they told the blogger makes it sound like a mistake and that it's the fault of the UN - and not of Hezbullah or the Lebanese government. To me - and probably most of you - it seems obvious that any rational person would want to remain in Israel and that statements about the town going back to Syria are for domestic consumption in Damascus, but I don't think we can be 100% sure, and I'm not convinced it matters. Even if these people would rather have the entire town go to Lebanon rather than the entire town staying in Israel, that's apparently not on the table and it doesn't make what is on the table any less irrational.
Second, time moves on and change comes about. Going back to a map that was in use nearly 90 years ago without accounting for the current reality is insane. Ghajar is a scene we're likely to see played out again and again if God forbid Israel ever decides to do what the 'Palestinians' want and give them every inch that was liberated in 1967. It would be insane to do that.
I've done several posts about the town of Ghajar over the last week or two. I felt sorry for the town's residents because I thought they had recognized that living in a modern, western democracy was better than living in a tribal oriented Muslim country. But it appears I was wrong.
Najeeb Khateeb, a spokesman for Ghajar, said his townsmen would have consented to the village being transferred in its entirety to Lebanon as a temporary measure before its ultimate return to Syria. He said he opposed the partition.
“We have no objection that the entire village, with all of its lands, be transferred to Lebanon,” he told The Media Line. “However, we refuse to become landless refugees in Lebanon. We remained here to guard our homes and land, even though 50% of our residents were uprooted in 1967 and now live in Syria. We would rather die here than become refugees.”
I actually had an opportunity to go to Ghajar yesterday (you need a special permit to get in), but I passed on it, because I had work to do and could not take the time to drive 3-4 hours in each direction to get there. I'm really glad I didn't go.
The 2,300 residents of the village, which straddles the Israel-Lebanon border, are having difficulty adjusting to images of the new reality to which they will be subjected and expressed rage at the fact that no one has asked them their opinion on the matter.
"Unfortunately, as usual, we are getting updates on what fate has in store for us through the media," Najib Khatib, spokesman for the village council, told Ynet.
"No government source has informed us of such a move, which will directly influence our lives and the fate of our children."
Khatib lamented the atmosphere existing in the village since the IDF's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000. "We live under siege," he said.
"During the Second Lebanon War we absorbed heavy property damage, and despite the fact that we are Israeli citizens and pay taxes to the state, there are residents who have not received compensation for the damages caused by the war until this very day, in contrast to other residents of northern Israel."
Council Chairman Ahmed Fatli met with members of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee recently and enlightened them on the difficulties faced by residents of the village. He relayed fears that Ghajar would come under the authority of the UN force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, fears that will be realized if Netanyahu's plan is green-lighted.
"We will not separate between family members," Khatib insisted. "The Berlin Wall fell, but now they want to establish a new wall here. Our fate must remain linked to that of the Golan Heights, since we were conquered together with it from Syria, and some of the older residents still hold bills of land ownership issued in Syria."
If I were them, I'd go protest outside the US embassy in Tel Aviv. Netanyahu is just bowing to the Americans on this one. He doesn't have the you-know-whats to say no to Obama.
Ghajar evacuation meant to press Hezbullah to disarm
In the comments, in my last post about Ghajar, someone suggested that the withdrawal from Ghajar was meant to pressure Hezbullah. And in fact, that's exactly what the JPost says, after quoting Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.
UNFIL political adviser Milos Strugar told The Jerusalem Post that according to UN resolution 1701, Israel was suppose to withdraw from all Lebanese territory, and had done so, with the exception of the northern part of Ghajar.
He said that in UNIFIL,"We have been actively engaged with all the parties on how to facilitate the withdrawal. Recently we forwarded some ideas for the withdrawal to Israel." An Israeli withdrawal could set the stage for more tension between Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri's Western-backed political bloc and its Shiite Hizbullah rivals, who have extended their political influence in Hariri's shaky coalition government and maintain the country's strongest military arsenal.
Hariri's allies would likely use the pullout to argue that Hezbollah no longer needs its weapons and that disputed land can be regained with the help of the international community instead. Hizbullah, which refuses to disarm, is already saying its military power would be to thank for any Israeli pullout.
Sorry folks, but this isn't going to get Hezbullah to lay down its arms. As implied above, Hezbullah will instead take credit for having forced Israel out of Ghajar, as is already happening.
Hizbullah on Sunday positioned itself to claim victory for any pullout.
"If the withdrawal happens, it (Israel) won't be doing it for free but because of fear of the resistance and Lebanon's strength through the resistance," Hizbullah legislator Nawar Saheli told The Associated Press in Beirut.
Moreover, Hezbullah has plenty of other excuses for keeping arms aside from Ghajar. There's Shaba Farms and there are the seven former Shiite villages that are now in Israel. Not to mention Israel itself.
No, it's not about Ghajar, and Israel withdrawing from Ghajar won't make Hezbullah give up its arms. We've already done the 'unilateral withdrawal' thing twice before - Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza and Northern Samaria in 2005. Not only didn't it bring peace, it brought war. Now, Netanyahu and Lieberman want to do it again.
Bibi to announce withdrawal from northern half of Ghajar
Last December, when I went on an IDF-sponsored trip to the North for bloggers, I wrote at length about the town of Ghajar and how its residents wanted to all remain part of Israel. A few days later, there was a report in Lebanon's an-Nahar that claimed that the IDF would be pulling back from the northern half of Ghajar and that the town would be divided. The residents of Ghajar were vehemently opposed and begged Israel to stay in the entire town.
It's taken a while, but now it seems that the government has gathered the spinelessness to do what the residents feared: Prime Minister Netanyahu plans to tell the UN on Monday that Israel will withdraw from the northern half of Ghajar, dividing the town into a Lebanese zone and into an Israeli zone (which the 'international community' regards as 'occupied Syrian territory).
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is expected to inform United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon of this plan, when the two men meet in New York on Monday, during Netanyahu's five day visit to the United States, according to officials.
The withdrawal plan has been discussed with senior members of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon.
Upon his return from the United States, Netanyahu is expected to ask the Security Cabinet to approve the plan, officials said.
The international border set by the United Nations, known as the “blue line,” runs directly through the middle of the village. Likud Deputy Minister Ayoub Kara, a Druze, warned in February that abandoning the village to U.N. forces could lead to its eventual takeover by Hizbullah terrorists.
Kara vowed last year to “fight with my last drop of blood” against Israel’s withdrawal from the village, many of whose 2,200 residents hold Israeli citizenship and have expressed fears of being forced to live under Lebanese rule.
I really don't understand what the government hopes to gain by doing this. It's not going to bring us any goodwill at the UN or anyplace else, it's going to bring Hezbullah even closer to our border in one spot, it's wrong on a humanitarian basis, and it's wrong because it shows weakness.
Netanyahu is turning out to be as much of a pussy as Olmert. What could go wrong?
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
