Doc's Talk: Hamas and Hezbollah´s satellite channels continue broadcasting via Arab-Muslim and Western satellites.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Hamas and Hezbollah´s satellite channels continue broadcasting via Arab-Muslim and Western satellites.

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center Newsletter

Overview

1. As part of the battle for hearts and minds, Hamas and Hezbollah invest great resources in operating a number of land and satellite television channels. They use them to spread their extremist Islamist ideology, which includes incitement against Israel, the Jewish people and Western countries. The broadcasts are received in the Middle East, western and southern Europe and various other countries around the world, and reach a vast number of Arab-Muslim communities
Overview

1. As part of the battle for hearts and minds, Hamas and Hezbollah invest great resources in operating a number of land and satellite television channels. They use them to spread their extremist Islamist ideology, which includes incitement against Israel, the Jewish people and Western countries. The broadcasts are received in the Middle East, western and southern Europe and various other countries around the world, and reach a vast number of Arab-Muslim communities.

2. In the past the United States and several European and South American countries made efforts to restrict the broadcasts. However, both Hamas and Hezbollah found ways to circumvent the restrictions by using satellite services provided by Arab-Muslim countries and by frequently changing the non-Arab communications companies they dealt with.1 The most prominent such companies are the Egyptian-owned Nilesat and the Arab-owned, Saudi Arabian-influenced Arabsat. Of note is the Indonesian Indosat, which broadcasts Al-Manar TV's programs to Asia and Australia.

Hamas

Al-Aqsa TV

Al-Aqsa TV logo
Al-Aqsa TV logo

3. Al-Aqsa TV is Hamas' most important TV channel. It began broadcasting in January 2006, after Hamas won the Palestinian Legislative Council elections in the Gaza Strip. From the beginning it has been Hamas' most important propaganda tool and is used to disseminate radical Islam, preach terrorism, spread anti-Semitic hate propaganda and oppose the peace process.2 The programs are broadcast via the Arabsat and AtlanticBird satellites but can also be received via Egypt's Nilesat.

Nilesat logo
Nilesat logo

Arabsat logo
Arabsat logo

4. On June 7, 2010, the French government instructed its broadcasting authority to stop the Al-Aqsa TV programs broadcast by satellites belonging to the Paris-based French communications company Eutelsat. That was done after France received a warning from the European commission stating that Al-Aqsa TV had repeatedly violated European laws and broadcast programs containing hate propaganda and incitement to violence, especially against Israel and the Jews (Agence France-Presse, June 7, 2010).

5. A recent examination indicated that Al-Aqsa TV is again using the French Eutelsat to broadcast its programs via a company called Noorsat. Its broadcasts reach countries outside the Middle East, including central and western Europe. Noorsat was founded in 2004 as a private company to provide satellite services for the Arab world and neighboring countries. Its offices are located in Bahrain and Jordan.

Noorsat logo

Al-Quds Satellite TV

Al-Quds TV logo

6. Hamas' Al-Quds TV began broadcasting in November 2008 to complement Al-Aqsa TV. It is owned by the Al-Quds radio and television company, which is registered in London to Arab and Palestinian businessmen and media personnel. Its programs are broadcast from Beirut, and it has an office in the Gaza Strip.3

7. To broadcast to the Middle East, North Africa and southern Europe, Al-Quds TV uses the services of Nilesat and Arabsat. The programs are broadcast via three communications satellites: Arabsat5A, Arabsat's Badr4, and Eutelsat's AtlanticBird4.

Hezbollah

Al-Manar TV

Al-Manar TV logo
Al-Manar TV logo

8. Al-Manar TV is Hezbollah's most important communications tool, immensely popular throughout the Middle East and beyond. Its programs preach the annihilation of Israel, praise terrorism and violence, and disseminate the Iranian version of radical Shi'ite Islam.

9. In recent years the international community, primarily the United States and South American and European countries, has been waging a struggle against the dissemination of Al-Manar broadcasts. So far the struggle has been only partially successful. Al-Manar TV broadcasts via five satellites, making it possible for its programs to reach the entire Middle East and a large part of Africa, southern Europe, Asia and Australia:

A. Palapa D, a satellite belonging to the Indonesian company Indosat: Its broadcasts cover Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Korea, Australia, New Zealand and the rest of Oceania, Japan, China, India, southern Russia, Iran and central Asia, and even parts of the Middle East and Africa. Indosat was government-owned until 2003, when the government sold most of its stock in the company. Qatar Telecom (Qtel) currently holds some 65% of the stock, directly and indirectly.

Indosat logo

B. Express AM22, which serves an Al-Manar TV experimental channel (according to the LyngSat website): The satellite belongs to an international space communications organization called Intersputnik, which covers 25 countries around the world from Latin America to Southeast Asia to Europe to the Arabian Peninsula. The company directorate is in Moscow

Intersputnik logo
Intersputnik logo

Map of Intersputnik's coverage
Map of Intersputnik's coverage

C. Arabsat5A: The satellite belongs to Arabsat, an Arab communications company under Saudi Arabian influence. Al-Manar TV's programs are also broadcast via Badr4.

D. Nilesat 102, an Egyptian-owned communications satellite.

1 For further information see the August 23, 2010 bulletin, "A number of satellite companies (including Western companies) continue providing communication services for Hezbollah and Hamas' television and radio, even though restrictions have been imposed by Europe and the United States "at http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e125.pdf.

2 A recent example is the speech given on November 5, 2010, by senior Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Zahar, broadcast by Al-Aqsa TV. For further information see the November 11, 2010 bulletin, "Hamas senior Mahmoud al-Zahar has recently given a vicious anti-Semitic speech to justify the elimination of Israel and the deportation of Jews from the 'entire territory of Palestine.' The speech contains themes reminiscent of those found in Al-Zahar’s anti-Semitic book No Future Between Nations, found on board the Mavi Marmara" at http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/ipc_e141.pdf.

3 For further information see the November 18, 2008 bulletin, Al-Quds, Hamas’s second satellite TV channel, went on air on November 11, further expanding that movement’s media empire.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does 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. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. 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.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does 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. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. 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."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk