A few days after this, deputy Hamas leader, Mosa abu-Marzouq, told the London based newspaper Al-Sharq Al-Awsat that there are no discrepancies between the two parties and both maintain good contacts with each other.

However, the Palestinian public has expressed scepticism about the agreement, which has been preceded by several similar agreements announced from different Arabic capitals. Most Palestinian politicians and political analysts are also sceptical about the agreement.

The fears of the Palestinian street came true when on Monday, the head of the Fatah bloc in the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), Azzam al-Ahmed, said that Fatah is going to form a new government in the West Bank to replace the deposed one headed by Salam Fayyad.

Al-Ahmed, the lead official in the Fatah delegation which negotiates with Hamas, affirmed that the government is not the one which they agreed on with Hamas in Cairo last week. "That one was postponed to three months later," he told the Palestinian daily Al-Ayyam.

Justifying his movement's retraction, Al-Ahmed said: "Because of the lack preparedness to issue presidential decrees to form the agreed upon government, and to begin preparations for the elections, formation of the reconciliation government was postponed."

Meanwhile, Hamas spokesman in Gaza, Mosheer al-Masri, called this move a retraction of pledges agreed upon in Cairo last week. "We [Hamas] are still committed to the Cairo agreement," he told MEMO. "Everything is expected to be carried out symmetrically."

Regarding Al-Ahmed's announcement, Al-Masri said: "Forming a new government in Ramallah refers to internal differences between Fatah and Fayyad and Hamas is something separate from these differences." But he insisted that his movement is ready to go ahead with implementing what was agreed in Cairo.

Answering a question on whether Fatah has informed Hamas about its lack of preparedness, Al-Masri said: "No, and we are still working to fulfil our obligations."

The independent PLC member based in the West Bank, Hassan Khreeshah, told MEMO that both movements "clearly failed to prove their commitments to what they agreed upon in Cairo." He blamed external pressure on both sides.

However, the prominent professor of political studies in the West Bank, Abdul-Sattar Qasem, said that any agreement announced between the two parties is "unreal" and that the Palestinians are always deceived. He implied that blame for the repeated retractions of the reconciliation agreements lay with Fatah and the PA.

Qasem ruled out any reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas because of vast differences in the political programmes of both movements. "One part's political programme is devoted to protecting Israel, and the programme of the other part is to fight Israel," he told MEMO.

To solve the problem, Qasem suggested a deep solution going back to 1993 when late Fatah leader Yasser Arafat signed the Oslo Accords with the Israeli occupation.

"That is what divided the Palestinian nation and resulted in the current division," he said. "When the Palestinians call these Accords off, they will reconcile with each other."

The event, chaired by Professor Bill Bowring who is a barrister at Field Court Chambers, focused on the past and future of Egypt and Palestine’s relationship. Bowring stated he had a long time interest in peace in the Middle East after visiting Palestine in 1988 at the beginning of the first Intifada. Prior to this he had "no interest whatsoever in international law, human rights or humanitarian law, but being there, in those circumstances, really opened my eyes." In May 2011, Bowring and a group of colleagues, housing lawyers specializing in eviction, visited East Jerusalem and published the report 'Enforcing Housing Rights: The Case of Sheikh Jarrah' on the results of their fact-finding mission.

Alashaal described the topic of the debate as "chronic," because all generations are talking about peace in the Middle East. He described Israel as "intentionally trying to exclude the Palestinians from the equation," and stated his assessment was that Israel doesn't want peace in the normal sense, it wants "life for the Israelis and death for the Palestinians." He went on to say that if Israel wants peace, it should negotiate with the Palestinians according to legal terms, that is the Security Council resolutions and international diplomacy from the last 30 years." He stated that "the crux of the matter" is the settlement policy and without an end to this there cannot be peace in the region.

According to Alashaal, during the revolution the protestors in the street were not talking about Israel or the United States; they were talking about the despotic regime of Mubarak, who was of course complicit in the conflict. He said that if Mubarak was still in power the Palestinian question would have been liquidated and that the former President was a strategic ally of Israel. For this reason he addressed the people of Israel, "who are innocent," and appealed to them to work together with others and collaborate for peace and democracy. "The Palestinians are an organic part of this region" he added.

On the subject of Syria, he said that if Syria falls, it will not be victorious for the people and that the struggle is not between the people and the regime anymore. There are many different elements involved - Iran, Israel, the USA - and "All forces are now engaged for their own agenda." For this reason, "We need to make a distinction between the regimes and the country. The country is permanent but the regimes are clothes and they are changeable. The interests of the country are permanent and sacred, but the regime is just a tool to serve. If it is good it can be maintained, if it is bad it should be removed. For all regimes this principle should be established."

The following day at Chatham House - an independent policy institute based in London - Alashaal spoke on the issue of human rights in the region. He said that post-revolution Egypt faces three main challenges. The first is the Islamists who were initially imprisoned and are now in power. He said that they are misunderstood by the "foreign quarter" and a lot of what is reported about them is manipulated. Second, is the youth, who "spearheaded the revolution," but have now been left behind. "They wanted all their dreams to be elected immediately" he added. The third challenge, he said, is that a convincing policy is lacking in Egypt.

He explained that a collection of signatures that intend to remove President Mohamed Morsi from office are growing, but that it was important to remember he was democratically elected into power and that this should be respected. He said that "The opposition is wasting its energy and losing its street credibility right before the parliamentary elections." Though the people are calling for the army to come back and fight the Muslim Brotherhood for them, "Morsi should stay in power until he’s finished. Criticizing him is ok, but removing him is not."

Alashaal said the security issues present in the country today date back to Mubarak, and without security Egypt cannot have a strong economy and a thriving tourism industry. He explained that torture and therefore "Repeating the atrocities of the past is rejected" and human rights can be established through the government and through the people. He stated that Egypt want to abandon military rule, which is entrenched, and work to reform the legacy passed down to the council, which declared the 2010 elections (in which Mubarak won more than 80% of the vote) as "democratic and transparent."

He said that it was time for Egyptian society to experience freedom and human rights after many years of suffering.

This and much more, has been the result of organized work carried out through organizations that steal land, such as the League of Gush Emunim. There has also been the formation of secret organizations that aim to terrorise and frighten citizens such as the organization of Terror against Terror.

These settler attacks have started to take a new form that is more widespread and more public, based on official political adoption by the Netanyahu government. It is worth mentioning that these attacks are no longer limited to residents of land occupied in 1967, but rather reach Palestinians of land occupied in 1948. It started with the Shafa Amro massacre committed in 2008, up to the attack against Um Alqatf village located in Almothalath (the Triangle) a few days ago, which shows that these attacks are not a reaction, but rather part of an existing settlement scheme in which settlers play a prominent part, using their position in the political and military institution to play a bigger role.

The Kibbutzim movement and avant-garde youth movements, which appear as leftist, were the ones who established the infrastructure for Israel before it was established and after. Now, today's settlement movements represent a clear manifestation of the youth of the Israeli project to renew it as a colonial, exclusionary settlement project, which has always been based on aggression and expansion. The occupation, with its accumulation over forty five years in the West Bank and Jerusalem, has turned into a situation much more dangerous than before; it is a situation that has its own characteristics and features that are mixed with a state of political, ideological, right winged extremism within Israeli society, politics and security.

Perhaps the above explains this qualitative development in the terror activities of Jewish settlers, which reached its peak in the attack against Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa mosque, currently subject to a scheme that attempts to divide it in a manner similar to what happened to the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron. When settlers recruited sixty thousand or more to attack Al-Aqsa mosque, this shows, without a doubt, the extent of power and influence that settlers in the West Bank and Jerusalem are now enjoying within Israeli society in general. Over the years the Israeli side has been witnessing a group of structural transformations that push towards more extremism and militancy.

One of the most dangerous transformations is the fact that West Bank and Jerusalem settlers have moved to the centre of decision making in politics and the army, and these settlers, and mainly their religious Zionist party, have a majority in Netanyahu's office including his consultant for national security Maj. Gen. (res.) Jacob Brigador, and his secretary Maj. Gen. (res.) Ovijay Mandelblit

In the current Israeli government, there are six ministers and deputy ministers who live in settlements and they are: Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, who lives in the settlement of Maccabim - Raaut, Minister of Education, Shai Peron, who lives in the settlement of Oranit, Minister of Housing, Uri Ariel, who lives in the settlement of Kfar Adumim, Minister Uri Orbach, who lives in the settlement of Modi'in, Deputy Minister Eli Ben Dahan, who lives in the settlement of Har Homa in Har Homa, and deputy foreign minister, Zeev alkene, who lives in the settlement of Kfar Eldad. There are also 16 deputies in the current Knesset. They all live in settlements and belong to more than one party.

Moreover, one third of mid-level military ranks in the Israeli army are occupied today by settlers belonging to the religious trend. In addition, a number of these settlers now occupy high military and security positions, all according to a recent book issued by Israeli researcher Iaquel Levy entitled: Between the hood and beret -religion, politics and the military in Israel.

This shows that "settlement is the essence of the Israeli project," as revealed by Shamir, one of Israel's most extreme and radical leaders. The project, since its establishment, was based on targeting land, and people on it, which made defending land and protecting it the centre of the struggle for the Palestinian people. But this continuous struggle over a century did not succeed in preserving the identity of the land, whether from political sovereignty or even geographic presence perspectives, where Palestinians have only 15% of their land left, according to the Palestinian Statistics Center. But in all cases, settlers' persistence wouldn’t have been allowed, or wouldn’t have been to this extent, if it weren't for the current Palestinian political elites, with their makeup, conflicts and divisions, which show inability to build a united national strategy capable of defending the land and protecting it and enhancing its people's steadfastness. 

So today it wouldn’t be exaggeration to say that while the Israeli project is clear in its goals towards the land - settling in it and Judaising it - the Palestinian project remains confused and ambiguous, with a state of improvisation and accusations prevailing over its leaders. This is based on narrow, individual and factional interests that do not relate to the land or the people and what they are exposed to at the hands of settlers including comprehensive and planned attacks that can easily be responded to politically and on the ground.

Didn't a large portion of these settlers leave their homes when Palestinians were united and active during the first Intifada (1987 - 1993), and during the second armed Intifada (2000 - 2004)? And wouldn't filing a Palestinian complaint to the International Criminal Court force Netanyahu's government to stop these settlers from further committing more violations than the ones that have already exceeded all imagination?

The author is a Palestinian writer. This article is a translation from the Arabic which appeared in Al Khaleej Newspaper, 19 May 2013

A Palestinian agricultural researcher has succeeded in producing 7 to 12 ears of wheat from a single seed each containing exactly 100 seeds.

This is one of four other successful experiments carried out by the agricultural engineer, Ali Odwan, the head of Beit-Hanoun Agricultural School.

Odwan expected that the result of his new successful experiment would increase wheat yields in the Gaza Strip because it doubles the wheat produced. "About 24 per cent of Gaza's land is, which is mainly deserted agricultural spaces near the Gaza borders, will be developed," he said.

According to the engineer, who affirmed that his is a unique result in the whole Arab world, the new modified seeds could withstand drought and shortages of rainfall.

He said that his experiments are in line with the meaning of the Quranic verse: "The example of those who spend their wealth in the way of Allah is like a seed [of grain] which grows seven spikes; in each spike is a hundred grains. And Allah multiplies [His reward] for whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing," Al-Baqarah: 261.

The researcher said that 1.5 dunams produces one ton of clean wheat. "This is two times the normal amount," he said. The new modified wheat depends mainly and only on rainwater and it is resistant to extreme and dry weather.

"The rainwater stopped in February this year, but the crop of the modified grains remained green even the thin ends of the spikes," the engineer said.

The engineer said that normal wheat takes 15 days to first appear out of the soil, but the modified seed takes only six days. The stalks of the new wheat plants are short (60cm) and produce a lot of straw which is used as fodder for animals.

The head of the sole agricultural school in Gaza has called for the ministry of agriculture to allocate 60 dunams of land to be planted the same way next year in order to produce amounts of grains enough for all Gaza farmers in the borderline areas.

In his first speech after receiving the soldiers and their families in Almaza military airbase in Cairo, Morsi said: "Those who possess arms must submit them to the government and those who are oppressed must raise a complaint. Then, over all law enforcement will be achieved."

In an effort to send a strong message to armed groups in Sinai and to the opposition which criticised him for not carrying out a military operation immediately after the abduction of the soldiers, Morsi said: "We are not the party to be blackmailed nor are we the party that take exceptional rash decisions."

Morsi said that Sinai is "secure and safe." He said that complete sovereignty over Sinai must be imposed over all Sinai and pledged to bring lawbreakers to justice.

The president spoke about the progress of the development projects in Egypt. "We are going ahead in our distinctive performance, our opposition is in our eyes… we follow up ministers day by day, we are not warmongers, we are able to achieve security inside and outside our borders and we can protect development, stability and peace."

He then called on Egyptian political forces for dialogue based on efforts aimed at achieving a united goal, noting that Egypt is going through a transitional period and "must keep going under a united leadership with united goals."

He also said: "We [ruling party and opposition] have to share each other's opinions because Egypt is bigger than us and Egypt and Egyptians' interest is the main load we bear.

"In order to be really the sons of the February 25 Revolution, our arms are opened to anyone who loves Egypt and all of us are parts of the same body."

This left the two young men with no choice but to demolish their own homes so as to avoid paying fines that could exceed 500 shekels should the interior ministry bulldozers be called in.

A father of one of the two young men said in an interview: "Because of the difficult economic conditions and our inability to pay fines, particularly after we built the house and put all our money and effort into it over the past years, we had to do this, with bitterness and pain, to avoid getting fined at a time when we are in dire need to pay back previous debts."

It is worth mentioning that one of the houses was inhabited by its owner, who got married a year ago, whereas the other owner was finalizing preparation of his house and getting ready to get married this summer."

The Negev Foundation: "This demolition is another step in the deportation schemes"

The Negev Foundation for Land and Man has stated that "this demolition is another step in the context of the scheme that Israel has begun to implement against the people of the Naqab. It is an ethnic cleansing scheme that will be legally approved as the Israeli Knesset has approved the racist Braver plan through which more than 45000 Arab citizens will be deported from the Naqab and forcefully resettled in the villages that are already suffering from a population crisis and complicated life conditions. As a result, the citizens will find themselves in a big prison under bad social conditions."

"From here, the Negev Foundation for Land and Man calls on the people of Naqab to participate in the protests that will be held in front of the Knesset and the protests that the High Steering Committee of the Arabs of the Naqab will approve. The Foundation also stresses that it intends to continue to support the resolve of the Naqab people against deportation and confiscation schemes by all possible means."

The piece was entitled "The Last of the Semites" and was, undoubtedly, controversial. Massad's piece looked at the early Zionist movement and its shared goal with anti-Semitic bigots: the removal of Jews from Europe. He also examined disagreements between Jews in Europe about the principle of Zionism, writing that many did not want to uproot to a new homeland.

Unsurprisingly, the article was met with outrage. Prominent figures such as the Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg took to Twitter: "Congratulations, Al Jazeera: You've just posted one of the most anti-Jewish screeds in recent memory," he wrote. Meanwhile, a Jerusalem Post blogger said that "Massad's writing on Israel can easily be confused with material from the neo-Nazi 'White Pride World Wide' hate site Stormfront."

Robust and violent debate and criticism is to be expected when writing on the subject of Israel, Palestine, and Zionism, particularly if the argument is as contentious as this one. However, rather than stand by its decision to publish Massad's piece, Al Jazeera removed the piece from its website without comment on Saturday.

In turn, this drew a whole wave of new criticism. Over at the Guardian, Glenn Greenwald attacked Al-Jazeera's actions as "behaviour that journalists should be condemning, not emulating." He wrote that "no media outlet can possibly do something like this without publicly accounting for what happened and expect to retain credibility. How can you demand transparency and accountability from others when you refuse to provide any yourself?"

Eventually, the piece was reinstated on Al Jazeera's website, along with a statement from Imad Musa, head of online. Musa denies allegations that "Al Jazeera succumbed to various pressures, and censored its own pages", but concedes "we should have handled this better".

The incident raises several issues, and it's important to separate them. On the one hand is the merit of Massad's argument, and on the other, is Al Jazeera's course of action. Massad is known to be a provocative and controversial academic, so Al Jazeera could reasonably have predicted that the piece would cause some shockwaves. It had previously published a piece by Masssad which explored similar arguments. He is not the first person to put forward this perspective; the links between early Zionists and Nazis has also been referred to by Mahmoud Abbas (who has also been criticised for these statements) and other academics. That is not to say it is not highly controversial. That conversations between Zionists and anti-Semites took place is not disputed, but the extent of this collaboration certainly is. UCLA academic David Myers has written that "to extrapolate from these few episodes an ongoing collaboration between Nazis and Jews is an historiographical sin of commission that rests on a faulty grasp of context and a distorted reading of the sources at hand". It's a heavily disputed area around which there is robust academic debate. As Greenwald writes, for those who find these views offensive, "the solution is to debunk them, not suppress them, since they're not going anywhere."

This brings us to the second issue here: Al Jazeera's conduct. Essentially, the merits of Massad's arguments aren't really the point. The fact is that Al Jazeera decided to publish the article in the first place, and then rather than deal with the ensuing criticism and debate, withdrew it without comment. If an article causes particular upset or offence, it is justifiable to remove it - Julie Burchill's Observer piece on transgender people earlier this year springs to mind - but it should not be done silently.

There has been a lot of speculation about Al Jazeera's reasons for doing so, with many pointing to its forthcoming launch in America. Massad himself has said he was "heartened" by the outcry, from the public and Al Jazeera employees, and has criticised "the peremptory power of the profit-seeking executives". The company has previously had problems getting it' English language channels carried by US distributors. It has purchased an existing cable network, Current TV, and will soon launch in America, but the channel still faces criticism from conservatives, who claim it expounds anti-Israel propaganda and promotes terrorism. Executive director for international operations of Al Jazeera America, Ehab Al Shihabi, has been actively promoting the company's mainstream credentials, so this controversy was poorly timed from a business perspective. It has been alleged that it was because Al Jazeera did not want to jeopardise its US launch that it withdrew the article. The Electronic Intifada looks at this in some detail.

There is no evidence for allegations of direct "Zionist pressure"; it is entirely possible that executives panicked and self-censored in the face of intense criticism. They would not be the first to do so. The reinstatement of the article is a positive move; whether or not the views expressed are abhorrent or unpleasant, it is better to have an open debate than to shut down the conversation altogether.

According to a senior Turkish official close to those attending the meetings in Washington, "Obama remained firm and insisted on limiting the American role to two matters: humanitarian aid to the Syrian refugees and the countries hosting them, and the diplomatic sponsorship of the Syrian dialogue leading to putting an end to the violence and reaching a solution."

On their part, American sources confirmed to the Kuwaiti newspaper Alrai that the American position was as told by the Turkish sources.

The Turkish official also said that Erdogan tactfully pointed out the "fluctuation" of the American position, addressing Obama during the dinner, which was attended by the foreign ministers of both counties, American John Kerry and Turkish Dawud Oglo. Without making eye contact with Kerry, he stated that the American Secretary of State had promised that the American plan for Syria aimed to "shift the military facts on the ground in favour of the opposition, in order for Bashar Al-Assad to read the writing on the wall and realise that there is no point of him staying in power and that the best solution for him was to step down" from authority.

Erdogan went on to say to Obama, "Today you are saying something different and the writing on the wall disappeared. You are now focusing on the conference in Geneva, which will be attended by Al-Assad's men believing that their military position is strong and that they can continue, which means they will not make any concessions."

Secondly, Erdogan pointed out Obama's clear backing down from "the red lines he set in the event that the Al-Assad regime used chemical weapons." The Turkish leader also said that "the credibility of allies calling for the removal of Al-Assad has gone down due to the American fluctuation, and it would be better for America to take any position rather than taking a position, only to back down from it later."

The Turkish prime minister ended by saying that "NATO credibility is also being shaken. Turkey is a member of the alliance and has been clearly attacked (Al-Rayhana bombing) by Al-Assad, and the alliance did not rise to defend it."

However, what was not mentioned by the Turkish official, but was added on by American officials who confirmed the Turkish story, was that Obama harshly responded to Erdogan saying that "Turkey never committed to any of the NATO positions that did not serve its national interests," and that it stood "Against the war in Libya, despite the fact that civilians suffered massacres at the hands of Gaddafi's forces, similar to those carried out by Al-Assad." Moreover, Obama added that "Even in 2003, you did not let the American troops use the Incirlik Air Base during the war in Iraq."

Obama considered the "NATO alliance to be strong, but each country acts within its own interests, especially when none of the member states are subjected to grave security threats requiring the alliance to take joint action to defend it."

He also added that "The US is willing to participate in any multi-lateral military action to defend Turkey in the face of any danger, whether it be Syria or any other country, however, America will not do this alone, and will act as a member state. If the alliance moves, then American will move with it." In another conversation, the American official reported that Obama hinted, "Not every problem in the world is our problem, but we are willing to contribute within the framework of international alliances or the UN."

Obama ended by urging Erdogan to use his relations in Moscow to change its position on Syria. Obama said "Our relations with (Russian President) Vladimir (Putin) are not at its best, but they have great commercial interests with you, so maybe you can influence their decisions in this regard."

Amid the American determination and insistence not to take any measures that may lead to a change in the situation in Syria, the Turkish official said that his country has become "dependent on building a regional alliancethat will fill the gap left by Washington's absence."

In this context, the Saudi Crown Prince Salman Bin Abdul-Aziz visited Turkey yesterday with an invitation by the Turkish President Abdullah Gul.

The Turkish official said that "Turkey and Saudi Arabia are working on resolving the Syrian crisis and forcing Al-Assad to step down as a prelude to engage in a national dialogue and to consider solutions for the post-Assad phase.

He concluded by saying that "There are many ideas proposed for discussion between the two countries on the Syrian crisis," and "Ankara will fill Riyadh in on the gist of Erdogan's meetings in Washington," and "After the visit in America, Turkey is counting on its regional alliances to deal with the Syrian crisis."

He told Al-Ghad newspaper that "Jordanian procedures are proceeding on as usual," and pointed out that the Syrian army's resumption of control over the areas near the Jordanian border might have limited the number of those fleeing to the Jordanian kingdom.

The official said that Jordan adopts a firm position towards the Syrian refugees, and there is no justification for the closure of the borders or for preventing them from seeking refuge in Jordan. He also stressed that Jordan is committed to the Refugee Convention and other relevant international conventions.

Sources from the Syrian opposition said that Jordan had closed the border for "security reasons" on the eve of the Core Group of the Friends of Syria's meeting yesterday.

The Commissioner General of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation in Washington, Maan Erekat, said: "The number of Israeli landmines planted is between 800,000 to a million."

During his meeting with UN and NGO officials in New York on Wednesday, Erekat said: "This significant number of landmines poses great direct danger to the safety and security of Palestinian citizens." He discussed efforts with the officials he met to remove these landmines.

Erekat reiterated the importance of "continuing the efforts being exerted by the UN and NGO in cooperation with Palestinian parties to remove the landmines planted around the occupied West Bank."

The Israeli occupation has planted landmines in the Palestinian territories since it occupied the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in 1967 under "security" pretexts.

There are about 51 landmine fields scattered around the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, especially in the Jordan valley, the north and west of the West Bank, near the 'Green Line,' around Israeli settlements and around large empty spaces where Israeli soldiers practice their military drills.

Haniyeh highlighted the strong relations between Palestine and Egypt, and wished Egypt security and stability. He also stressed that "security in Sinai is an integral part of Palestinian national security."

On his part, the governor expressed his appreciation and gratitude for the prime minister's sentiments, and considered the role played by Egyptians to be "a duty towards the Palestinian people, as Palestine and Egypt are people from one nation; sharing bread and water." He added "we are celebrating two things: the release of the soldiers and showing appreciation of the prime minister and his sentiments."

The paper reported that when settlers tried to search on the Google search engine, a note appeared in front of them notifying the need to search by "Google Palestine google.ps" and not "Google Israel google.co.il" as they had done in the past.

The Director General of the Legal Forum for the Land of Israel sent a letter to Google Inc. stating, "It's unfortunate that Google, which is a business entity and not a political body, has decided that the residents of Judea and Samaria belong to the Palestinian Authority."

"We are calling on you to remove this proclamation," it added.

In response, Google's spokesman said that the search engine aimed to provide the "best experience" for all of its users.

A Palestinian activist in Israeli settlement file Ghassan Daglas told Quds Press news agency that "The settler ran over Zaaria Asaous, 15, while he was crossing the main street in Beita village near Nablus."

The boy was rushed to a Palestinian hospital in Nablus and according to Quds Press, medical sources say he is in critical condition. He has several wounds and bruises all over his body. Medical sources said that he was admitted to the IUC for intensive care.

It is noteworthy to mention that this is the second accident of its kind within 24 hours.

Another Israeli settler ran over a Palestinian girl on Wednesday evening in the West Bank city of Hebron. The girl was identified as Zeinab al-Fakhouri, 9.

She was rushed to a Palestinian hospital in the city and, according to medical sources, she sustained serious injuries.

In both cases, the settlers fled the scene.

Such incidents have been repeatedly reported and documented by activists and human rights organisations. But it is apparent that the Israeli occupation does not hold the perpetrators accountable for aggressive acts towards Palestinians.

This is what encourages settlers to continue being aggressive towards Palestinians, stated The Palestinian Human Rights Group (Al-Raqeeb.)

Below is a video from a similar incident in 2010.

Most are seen as loyalists to Khamenei, while those rejected included former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie, a close aide to outgoing president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Testing the waters before the Guardian Council's decision, Iran's national deputy police commander Esmael Moghaddam sounded a warning last week in the Shargh newspaper for Mashaei to stop challenging the Supreme Leader by claiming to take orders from a higher authority - namely Al Mahdi, the 12th Shi'ite Imam.

There was also an editorial by Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the state-run newspaper Kayhan and an appointee of Khamenei, declaring the "Ahmadinejad government is over" and predicting "Rafsanjani will undoubtedly face defeat".

These were the first indications that the current president's candidate could be purged and a clear sign of how election cards would be stacked to defeat Rafsanjani.

Pundits in the West have argued for years that the method of choosing candidates in Iran's election is the least democratic.

It is far from being a representation of plural democracy, but neither is the filtered democratic process in the West - where backdoor dealings, not a popular vote, determine which party's candidate wins a general election.

To the chagrin of the West, the final candidates in Iran might quarrel over many issues, but they all support Iran's right to develop a "peaceful" nuclear programme.

Other than the new president forming a new negotiating team, there will be little change at the negotiation table once Ahmadinejad is replaced.

Some might take a more pragmatic approach in dealing with world powers, while others are poised to take a more assertive position. Among the candidates still in the race is Iran's nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili, who said in an interview with the Financial Times that "Western powers will be forced to make compromises only when they are confronted with fierce resistance".

In past Iranian elections, voters have been more inclined to opt for the nominee who registers lowest on the corruption barometer and has the highest levels of nationalistic demagoguery. Taking a hardline position with the 5+1, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, would likely improve the presidential candidate's chances of winning votes.

The irony, which many have forgotten, is that more than five decades ago some of the 5+1 countries introduced nuclear military technology to the Middle East.

France built Israel's nuclear reactor in the late 1950s and Britain provided the heavy water to start up the plant in 1959.

The highly enriched uranium to make Israel's first nuclear bomb was purportedly stolen from the US Navy in the mid-1960s.

The West's inability to reach an agreement with Iran today can't be separated from its failure in dealing with the crisis in Syria or its submissiveness to Israel when it comes to Palestine.

To succeed, the West must first stop viewing the Middle East through an Israeli prism. Next, it should take bold steps to rectify past sins by promoting a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.

Otherwise, and as we have learnt from the Iraq experience, Iran will not be the last of the problems.

* Mr Kanj (www.jamalkanj.com) writes weekly newspaper column and publishes on several websites on Arab world issues. He is the author of “Children of Catastrophe,” Journey from a Palestinian Refugee Camp to America. This Op-Ed piece can be published with the author’s permission.

Recently, several media outlets circulated reports and news on the presence of foreigners in the ranks of the Free Army and revolution brigades. Some also reported the presence of complete brigades made up of foreign fighters, usually known amongst Jihadists as "immigrants". "Masar Press" spoke to some of these fighters and brigade leaders to find out what drives them to come to Syria, and also reported on Syrian opinions on dealings between foreign fighters and civilians.

Between regime propaganda and field statics

Since the beginning of the revolution, media outlets loyal to the regime were keen to use terms that would alarm the West and the rest of the world. Perhaps the latest of such statements was made by the Minister of Information in the Assad government, Omran Zoubi, who said that the percentage of foreign fighters in the country has reached almost 80 per cent.

However, all relevant studies indicate that they represent a very small percentage. According to the estimates of "The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation" (ICSR), the maximum total number of foreign fighters in Syria over the entire period of the revolution amounts to about 5,500 fighters, while the minimum number of the opposition forces is 60,000 fighters. This means, based on the centre's data, foreign fighters make up less than 10 per cent of the total number of opposition fighters.

In this regard, an official from the "Sham Freedom Movement" told "Masar Press" that the number of foreign fighters in the movement's ranks are "very few" and pointed out that one of the most important fighters who fought in the ranks of the movement is the Emirati Colonel, Mohammed Abdouly, who was involved with the movement and supported it with his military experience.

Moreover, Abu Farouk, leader of one of the battalions in rural Damascus, explained that the percentage of foreign fighters in Damascus and its outskirts does not exceed 5 per cent of the total fighters on the Damascus Front. Moreover, he noted that the victories made on the ground "cannot be achieved by foreigners due to their lack of knowledge of the land."

Immigrants from various countries and regions

Opposition groups usually call non-Syrians fighting against the regime "immigrants". This term is especially used by Al-Nusra Front and groups adopting the Jihadist ideology.

Abu Huzm Al-Kurdi, leader of the Tali'at Al-Haq Brigades in the countryside of eastern Aleppo noted that out of all the opposition groups, the Al-Nusra Front allocates specific brigades for "immigrants", assigning them to support operations and giving them their own headquarters in northern Aleppo.

The fighters are from several Arab and Western countries, and Abu Huzm Al-Kurdi speaking about this explains that Saudis, Egyptians and Moroccans make up the largest number of Arab fighters, whereas many of the European fighters are of Moroccan origins. Moreover, there is a small percentage of fighters from former Soviet Union counties, especially Chechnya and Kyrgyzstan.

All reports obtained by "Masar Press" indicate that the vast majority of these fighters are in the northern and eastern areas of Syria due to its proximity to the border.

Some for humanitarian reasons and others for Islamic Jihadi reasons

Foreign fighters usually avoid contact with the media, but "Masar Press" was able to talk to some. Amongst these fighters was Abdulrahman Al-Zaltini (from the Libyan city of Zliten) who fights alongside Syrian and Arab fighters in the "Liwaa Al-Umma" brigade, founded in Ma'arrat al-Nu'man in Idlib.

Abdulrahman reveals the existence of fighters of other nationalities in his brigade including Egyptians and Tunisians who have a range of different motives for going to Syria, including humanitarian and Islamic jihad reasons. Regarding the reasons that led him to Syria, he said "We are here to defend our Syrian brothers who have suffered injustice even more than the Libyans suffered injustice under Gaddafi's regime."

A prominent official of the "Sham Freedom Movement" summarised the reasons that drove the Emirati Colonel, Mohammed Abdouly, to go to Syria by saying "he was driven by the international and Arab failure to put an end to the suffering of the Syrians, he came to support the Syrians and to become a martyr."

These reasons also included denominational motives. When we met "Abu Huthaifa Al-lebnani", he stressed that his presence was "a response to Hezbollah's sectarian intervention in the area."

Islamic motives and belief in the establishment of a "Caliphate State" remains one of the most important motives, as Abu Huzm Al-Kurdi, an Iraqi fighter said, "His project is not over when Bashar Al-Assad is overthrown, but when an Islamic state is established."

Most of the foreign fighters we met were highly educated and cultured, most of whom had earned science degrees. Abdulrahman Al-Zaltini (with a Bachelor's degree in network engineering) says "most of my fellow fighters are university graduates. They came fully convinced that they are doing what they are doing because they are educated and most of them are religious."

He talked about the degrees of some of the Arab fighters that came with him, "Huthaifa Al-Masri graduated with a degree in Mine Engineering and studied Sharia'a Studies under Al-Azhar scholars in Egypt."

Abu Huzm Al-Kurdi also lists some of those who he describes as intellectuals with degrees in Sharia'a and other fields, "Abu Baker Al-Masri has a Master's degree in Energy Science, Abu Abdulrahman Al-Masri is a teacher in Egypt and Abu Muath Al-Saudi has a Master's degree in political thought."

Cautious friendly relationships

In regards to dealings between foreign fighters in Syria and Syrian civilians, we asked a member of the Ismaili community, Abu-Asa'ad, from the city of Al-Silmiya about how the foreigners treat them. He did not hesitate in saying that such fighters "do not hide their hatred of the sect, as they regard them as misguided." However, there are also those who "we have seen nothing but good from, such as Abu Mohammad Al-Tunisi".

Abu-Asa'ad believes it is wrong for "strangers" to assume leadership of the brigades due to their lack of knowledge concerning "Syrian privacy, which causes some people to alienate them."

Abu Huzm Al-Kurdi praises the "immigrants" on their dealings with the Syrian people, as in his opinion, the immigrants are caring and "always leave behind a good impression." He also believes that, in general, they are trustworthy and friendly towards the people and make "moving speeches that move people and encourage them to fight and join the ranks of the fighters."

Finally... The most important question remains: Will the foreign fighters abandon their weapons after the fall of Al-Assad? Are they prepared to return to their countries? This question was not answered clearly by anyone. In the eyes of the Syrians, this issue remains unlikely, because these fighters went to Syria for "ideological and intellectual reasons and have dedicated their lives to Jihad." Abu Asa'ad also says their presence in Syria after the fall of Al-Assad will be "a source of tension."

Witnesses said that a number of Israeli forces wearing the uniform of Palestinian workers got out of a white car and attacked two Palestinians. They kidnapped Shojaa Qurainin, 25, and fled. No information is as yet known about his whereabouts. Medical sources said that the other citizen, Rabee Jaradat, 24, was admitted to hospital for treatment of light wounds.

Residents from the area where the attack took place reported that a group of Israeli military forces arrived, erected a military checkpoint and started checking cars.

Meanwhile, Israeli forces detained five Palestinian pupils from an orphanage in Jerusalem over an alleged attack on an Israeli settler.

Headmaster of the Islamic Orphan School, MAzen Jamjoum, said that the pupils were arrested immediately after leaving the school and that they are aged between 13 and 15 years old. One of the children was arrested while with a teacher.

Jamjoum said that he visited the police station at the Bab Al-Buraq Gate of the Al-Aqsa Mosque to inquire about why the students had been arrested. He said that the Israeli police told him they were going to check their CCTV cameras to get more details about the alleged attack on the settler.

In pre-dawn raids on Nablus, Tobas and Qalqilya, Israeli occupation forces swept the houses of three Palestinian security officers and arrested them.

The officers are accused of killing an Israeli settler in April 2011 during a settler invasion of the Tomb of Youssef in Nablus in the occupied West Bank. The Palestinian author said that the settlers broke into the Tomb and clashes with Palestinian citizens erupted.

In an effort to crackdown on the clashes, the Palestinian security officers fired in the air and as the settler fled, his car hit a plastic Palestinian police barrier.

The Palestinian Authority carried out an investigation into the incident and detained four Palestinian officers accordingly; each for six months.

Israelis protested against the light sentences and pushed the Palestinians to sue the culprits again. Three got one year and the fourth got four years in prison. Those sentenced to one year have been recently released after serving their full sentence.

They are Nawwaf Bani-Owdeh from Tobas, Saleh Hamid from Ramallah and Wael Daud from Qalqilya.

The media invasion in Egypt has also brought in new rules and creative media methods that utilise unsporting, criminal and internationally illegal weapons that violate media laws and norms. They were also inspired by Nazi Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels' saying "Give me media with no conscience; I will give you people who are unconscious." This is the path they took and were able to achieve quick success in the beginning of the invasion after dressing Mubarak's corrupt journalists in the robes of revolution and perseverance, even after they had praised him throughout the revolution. This process of clearing reputations was just the beginning of the brainwashing of the people, easing into their main goal for which the current media invasion was launched, which is to ultimately take over the people's consciousness and form new ideas against the revolution turning it from the people's revolution into a conspiracy carried out by the Muslim Brotherhood to seize control of the country.

These ideas have emerged in foreign-funded newspapers that are rewriting the history of the revolution and using their smart bombs to hit the body and mind of the revolution and ultimately kill it. In their new version of the story, they write that those who overthrew Mubarak were not Egyptians but members of Hamas, the military wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, who opened the prisons, destroyed buildings and killed the supporters of the revolution. This immoral and unprofessional nonsense is a disgrace to the revolution; a waste of martyrs' blood and a disregard of the people wounded and disabled during the revolution who sacrifices greatly for the sake of a greater cause – the freedom and dignity for the Egyptian people. However, this misguided media that promotes lies and fabrications does not care about such causes and reports such falsehoods by quoting "anonymous sources". This is the new fad that has plagued the media in light of this obnoxious media invasion which has completely distanced it from professionalism. A basic rule of professionalism is to verify a story from at least two sources before even thinking about reporting it. However, sadly, professionalism has been lost amid billions of banknotes which have transformed the pen, which God Almighty swore by, into a tool for the propagation of lies and delusion and the spread of discord in the country. Under the banner of such "anonymous sources", corrupt newspapers report artificial battles between the presidency and the various state institutions; sometimes the battles are with the army, and at other times with Al-Azhar or with the police, etc. The purpose of this is to turn all parts of society against the elected President, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood, who also haven't been spared from these "anonymous sources".

Media which blurs and distorts facts must be addressed by the honourable people of this admirable profession. I realise that there are positive attempts from some colleagues protective of the profession, and whose hearts are saddened by this decline and fall of their colleagues who have stained the profession as a whole. They are now trying to pick up the pieces and set things right, however how can these diligent attempts succeed when those controlling the media are the students of "Goebbels" who taught them to lie. Moreover, millions of pounds are being used to blind them and turn them into political leaders after abandoning the profession and indulging in politics only for the purpose of overthrowing the Muslim Brotherhood. The irony lies in the fact that they are the ones who have fallen after the people have seen the truth of their ways and their ugly faces were shown, but the Muslim Brotherhood will not fall; (And the unbelievers schemed but God brought their scheming to nought: for God is above all schemers.)

Also, the research results indicated that Al Jazeera Arabic news programs and coverage were ranked as the top 10 news programs and segments aired on all news channels.

Commenting on the statistics, Ahmed Bin Jassim Al Thani, Director General of Al Jazeera Media Network, said Al Jazeera's continues to lead due to its distinguished commitment to a code of ethics along with professional editorial policies based on the "opinion and the other opinion", always delivering content in an accurate, objective and balanced manner. The channel's success is based on the determination and integrity of Al Jazeera correspondents who are always seeking the truth even as they are exposed to continuous threats, which in some instances, have led to death as in the case in Syria. The challenges we face every day also include the closure of our offices recently in Iraq, in an attempt to deter us from continuing our coverage of the important stories.

Ahmed Bin Jassim Al Thani also added that Al Jazeera is grateful to its viewers for their continued trust even with more channels to choose from, where we were once the only free media outlet in the region, but now many local channels have launched in the post-revolutionary context. We've embraced and supported this, as more free journalism is best for everyone.

Al Jazeera will remain committed to deliver captivating content where the human is at the center of the story, to continue getting exclusive stories, conducting in-depth investigations through the largest newsgathering network of correspondents in the world along with the latest current affairs programs.

Source: Al Jazeera

The Israeli daily, Yedioth Ahronoth, reported that Weinstein wrote to Ya'alone asking him to ensure criminal enforcement of planning and construction violations in the West Bank without delay.

"There is hardly any criminal enforcement of planning and construction violations in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank], this is largely due to the absence of an investigative body charged with handling the issue," Weinstein is reported to have written.

Weinstein wrote that he had highlighted the issue in his testimony to the Israeli High Court of Justice last year. He said that the defence forces are working to reinforce the Civil Administration's inspection unit in the West Bank.

He also wrote in his letter to Ya'alone: "In my letter to the previous defence minister, I expressed my view that the unit charged with overseeing construction at the Civil Administration, which operates at the administrative level, should take on investigative duties at the criminal level."

According to the newspaper, the attorney general noted that the issue was also raised by the state auditor in a report issued last year.

Weinstein said that the report of the state auditor suggested that the lack of criminal enforcement in the area of planning and construction violations in Judea and Samaria [West Bank] helps perpetuate the status quo where people are free to do as they wish.

In response to Hamas leader Dr Salah Al-Bardawil's congratulations of the Egyptian authorities for releasing the Egyptian soldiers, Othman said, "We commend the patience and endurance of the Palestinian people while the Rafah crossing was closed in order to resolve this crisis."

Egypt's President, Mohammad Morsi, the Minister of Defence and its military leaders all received the seven soldiers in the Almatha Airport after the Egyptian army was able to set them free early this morning.