What will happen to the Gazan militias?

What will happen to the Gazan militias that oppose Hamas and "collaborate with Israel"?

There is a lot of discussion in Gazan channels about the fate of the militias of Yasser Abu Shabab in Rafah and Ashraf Al-Mansi in the north of the Strip, about which much has been written in recent months.

Channels affiliated with Hamas hint that their fate will be death at the hands of operatives from Hamas's military wing – and this is due to the agreement signed and the expected Israeli withdrawal.

Both Yasser Abu Shabab and Ashraf Al-Mansi published videos expressing support for the Trump plan – even after Trump published the withdrawal maps.

Looking at the maps, it can be understood why they have no concerns, and most of the media noise generated around them by Hamas channels is simply cheap propaganda.

On the map with yellow circles are the estimated locations (according to Palestinian sources) where the members of these militias are staying – al-Mansi in the north of the Strip (Beit Hanoun) and Abu Shabab in the south of the Strip (east Rafah).

One can see that even after the second stage of the Trump plan – which still seems very far off – the militias are staying in areas from which the IDF will not withdraw at all.

So, there is no apparent chance that the militias will be at special risk as a result of the IDF withdrawal according to the Trump plan.

Hamas is supposed to be disarmed and removed from power before the IDF evacuates the area between the red and yellow lines (which, according to the plan, is to be handed over to foreign forces anyway).

THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT

( Cross posted from Grandma's Army)

 

BUT how many people care about the truth any more?

What will it take for the world to wake up to the fact that they have been royally duped! Genocide and famine are the creation of Hamas to seek support from their supporters and useful idiots around the world and the world media fell for it.

The first time the name “Palestine” came into use was around 2000 years ago when the Romans invaded the Jewish nation of Judea. That, by the way, is where the word “Jew” came from. After the Romans occupied Judea, they called it Syria Palestina.

Fast forward to the end of the Ottoman Empire In 1917 and 1918, the area known as “Palestine” came under British control. In 1919, the League of Nations divided up the Ottoman empire and Great Britain was appointed to govern the area - establishing the British Mandate in Palestine. Out of self-interest and political motives, the British carved off a huge piece of Palestine and created Jordan. In 1947, the UN proposed to partition the rest of the land into an Arab and a Jewish country. The Jews accepted, (barely 10% of the original proposal) the Arabs refused. In 1948 the Jews living in what was once the British Mandate declared their country, Israel.

Prior to the establishment of the State of Israel Jews during the Mandate, (including my late husband), called themselves “Palestinians”. They had passports, issued by the Mandate, that gave their nationality as “Palestinian”.

In the Six-day War in1967 after Israel recaptured the Gaza Strip, the “West Bank” and East Jerusalem from the Jordanians, 355,000 Arab refugees were relocated from the Gaza Strip to Jordan. 

In 1971, King Hussein, fearing the growing influence of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PLO), cracked down on Palestinian nationalists (Black September). Over 3,000 Palestinians were massacred and some 20,000 fled Jordan.

It was in 1964 that the Arab population first started calling themselves “Palestinians”. Palestine as a distinct country never existed. Every record prior to the PLO Charter in 1964 proves the fabrication of “Palestinians”. That’s why there is no historical record of kings, heroes, myths or archeological sites, etc.

In 1977 Zuheir Mohsen, a senior PLO leader, stated explicitly: “The Palestinian people do not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity… Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity exists only for tactical reasons.”

The “Stanford Review” also detailed the fabrication of Palestine, and Soviet involvement in, “The Deception of Palestinian Nationalism”: ‘Historically, the Palestinian “desire for statehood” and “need for liberation” was invented in large part by the Soviet Union’.

The KGB had a talent for propaganda, which included the creation of the PLO. It is no coincidence that the blueprint for the PLO Charter was drafted in Moscow in 1964 and was approved by 422 Palestinian representatives’ hand- picked by the KGB. At that time, the USSR was in the business of creating people’s liberation fronts. Other examples included The National Liberation Army of Bolivia (1964) with Ernesto “Che” Guevara at its head and the National Liberation Army of Colombia (1965).”

When Jordan became an emirate, known as Transjordan, and later a state - its population is therefore ethnically "Palestinian", or at least had no ethnic differences with the Palestinians west of the Jordan river. The argument for an independent Palestinian state usually uses a "right to self determination" - to argue that ethnic Palestinians deserve a state of their own. So, why isn't the creation of Jordan as a state considered the Palestinian homeland? Who is it that we are arguing deserves their own state, and why are they culturally/ethnically different from Jordanians in the early 1900's?

Three times, Israel sought to offer a land-for-peace swap, on very generous terms, but was rejected.  This surely points to the fact that Palestine could only mean a country designed to be in opposition to Israel's existence. Added to the unquestionable fact that there does not exist any published form of the PLO Charter, (and after 2005 the Hamas charter) without the articles calling for the destruction of Israel. 

The original war in 1948 was between Israel and other Arab states, not Israel and the Palestinians, who didn't come into existence as a category of people, until almost 20 years later.

Civil War In Gaza?

 

So, point 1 of the 21-point “Peace Plan” was confirmed: a ceasefire and Hamas’s release of Israeli hostages in exchange for 2,000 convicted Palestinian terrorists from internationally recognized groups.

 Although there is an element of relief, it did not take long for the senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan in an interview with Arab media to interpret the agreement somewhat differently from the 21-point plan.

a)     * the agreement reached by the parties stipulates the definitive end of the war in Gaza. (not in the agreement)

b)    *  the mediators provided guarantees that “the occupation” (Israel) would not violate the agreement and left the announcement of the end of the war to the American side.

c)    *  there will be no prisoner exchanges unless the end of the war is declared. (not in the agreement)

d)     * the central point in the agreement is the end of the war.

Underlying the focus on getting an agreement. the main issue occupying the internal security channels of Hamas since the announcement of reaching an agreement is how they will get their hands on (revenge) the militia members of Yasser Abu Shabab and their counterparts in Khan Yunis and in the northern part of the Strip. (that cooperated with Israel)

The main thing this teaches us is that Hamas is still very interested in eliminating the alternatives to its rule in Gaza – it wants to continue ruling the Strip and to fortify its control by eliminating public rivals – Yasser Abu Shabab is the symbol of this, as far as they are concerned.

Does this mean a civil war can break out? Watch this space.

Can Trump’s Gaza peace deal last?

By Jonathan Sacerdoti. For full text see https://jonsac.substack.com/p/can-trumps-gaza-peace-deal-last?triedRedirect=true  

Together, Trump and Netanyahu have achieved what few thought possible: an agreement for the release of all hostages held in Gaza and a broad cessation of hostilities, at least for now. The is a big moment, but also an unclear and perilously risky one.

The deal, announced publicly but still potentially in flux, contains both substance and shadow. According to Israeli sources, 20 live hostages are to be released in the initial phase, with expectations that this will occur by Sunday night. Hamas, for its part, has confirmed a framework involving the end of fighting, Israeli withdrawal from Gaza (possibly 70 per cent of the strip), the entry of humanitarian aid, and a prisoner exchange. The guarantor states – Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, and the United States – have reportedly secured assurances against the resumption of war so long as both parties honour the terms.

Yet many details remain ambiguous, and deliberately so. Maps of Israeli withdrawal have been amended, and five crossings are set to open for aid. It’s reported that for every living hostage, as many as 100 convicted terrorists will be freed, among them senior figures sentenced to life for murder. This is a brutal price for Israel. But for many families awaiting a son, a daughter, a child, it is one they have long been willing to pay.

President Isaac Herzog said what millions feel: ‘All the people of Israel stand with the hostages. All the people of Israel stand with the families.’

But not all images comfort. From Gaza, videos immediately emerged of men who appear well-fed and strong, celebrating in the streets. Terror-affiliated media chant genocidal slogans – ‘Khaybar, Khaybar ya Yahud’ – whose message is one of eternal battle and endless death of Jews. Senior Hamas operatives, including Zaher Jabarin, photographed smiling in the Sharm El-Sheikh negotiation rooms, do not smile for peace. Their smile indicates that for them at least survival, and perhaps advantage, has been secured.

This agreement will bring a kind of calm. But calm is not peace. It is not justice. It is not safety. Even yesterday, Hamas-aligned media were promoting videos of their military wing training to abduct IDF soldiers, declaring such operations ‘inevitable.’ Meanwhile, those in Gaza who worked with Israel to protect non-Hamas aligned Gaza residents, such as Yasser Abu Shabab, have become targets of death threats and face possible annihilation in the vacuum of Israeli withdrawal. And what of the ‘innocent civilians’? If Hamas clings on to power it will reinforce it brutally and ruthlessly as it always does. If not, it can be easily replaced by other equally brutal Islamic terrorist factions keen to fill its place.

The Palestinian movement has not earned peace. It must show that it wants more than survival, more than revenge, more than martyrdom. That it wants a future. Until then, no agreement, no photo-op, no negotiated phrase can promise stability, even if the hostages come home for now.

In the days ahead, we will see weeping and celebration, heartbreak and healing. The hostages will come home, and with them, untold stories of horror and survival. We will also see funerals. Some will return dead. Some, not at all, for the Palestinian terrorists are likely to stall and lie at every possible opportunity and ensure the pain is dragged out. It is unlikely they will truly give up every last hostage.

No single agreement can reverse decades of indoctrination and incitement. No single gesture can dismantle the machinery of hatred that has ruled Palestinian political life and ideology for generations. In the days ahead, Israel will witness scenes that test the limits of the human heart. There will be reunions so overwhelming they will shake the nation to its core, and losses so final that no agreement on earth can soften them.

But even as we embrace the living, we must not ignore what else this deal unleashes. Celebrations erupt in Gaza not just for the return of prisoners, but for the return of convicted murderers, some of them architects of massacres, now welcomed home as heroes. It is a decision made under unbearable moral pressure, and one that may come to stain the future with fresh blood.

UN Watch accuse the accuser

 Although Qatar accused Israel of breaching its sovereignty, UN Watch, 

using the words of the Saudi Foreign minister, turns the tables and accuses Qatar

Vital Theft by Hamas Totally UNREPORTED

 Unicef has confirmed it in black and white: armed men in Gaza hijacked aid trucks at gunpoint, stealing ready-to-use therapeutic food meant for thousands of severely malnourished infants. According to the UN, at least 2,700 children have been deprived of life-saving nutrition as a result. And yet, the world barely blinked.

Where is Keir Starmer’s public determination to punish the perpetrators? Where are the front pages brimming with rage? Where is the BBC’s solemn-voiced, tear-jerking report? Even Unicef, in its carefully worded statement, declined to name the perpetrators or describe where the stolen food was taken. The aid was ‘diverted’. The trucks were ‘commandeered’. 

Contrast this silence with the tone adopted by the UK’s permanent representative to the UN, Ambassador Barbara Woodward, in her July address to the Security Council. ‘The Israeli aid system is inhumane, ineffective, dangerous and fuelling instability,’ she said. She condemned the IDF and praised the UN’s ‘brave efforts’ to deliver aid. Hamas, she said, was ‘is exploiting this disorder’. No explicit mention was made of aid theft or of the terror group’s systemic exploitation of the aid economy for profit and power.

Compare these Women's Faces