Stealing Success Tel Aviv Style

By Philip Giraldi, AntiWar.com, January 28, 2010

A curious op-ed "The Tel Aviv Cluster" by the reliably neo-connish David Brooks appeared in the New York Times on January 12th. Brooks enthused over the prowess of Israel’s high tech businesses, attributing their success in large part to Jewish exceptionalism and genius, which must have provided the ultimate feel good moment for Brooks, who is himself Jewish. That Israel has a booming technology sector is undeniably true, but Brooks failed to mention other contributing factors such as the $101 billion dollars in US economic and military aid over the course of more than four decades, which does not include the additional $30 billion recently approved by President Barack Obama. American assistance has financed and fueled Israel’s business growth while the open access and even "preferential treatment" afforded to Israeli exporters through the Israel Free Trade Implementation Act of 1985 has provided Israelis with the enormous US market to sell their products and services. By act of Congress, Israeli businesses can even bid on most American Federal and State government contracts just as if they were US companies.

Brooks was characteristically undisturbed by the fact that American taxpayer subsidized development of Israeli enterprises combined with the free access to the US economy and government contracts eliminates jobs and damages competing companies on this side of the Atlantic. And there is another aspect of Israel’s growing high tech sector that he understandably chose to ignore because it is extremely sleazy. That is the significant advantage that Israel has gained by systematically stealing American technology with both military and civilian applications. The US developed technology is then reverse engineered and used by the Israelis to support their own exports with considerably reduced research and development costs, giving them a huge advantage against American companies. Sometimes, when the technology is military in nature and winds up in the hands of a US adversary, the consequences can be serious. Israel has sold advanced weapons systems to China that are believed to incorporate technology developed by American companies, including the Python-3 air-to-air missile and the Delilah cruise missile. There is evidence that Israel has also stolen Patriot missile avionics to incorporate into its own Arrow system and that it used US technology obtained in its Lavi fighter development program, which was funded by the US taxpayer to the tune of $1.5 billion, to help the Chinese develop their own J-10 fighter.

The reality of Israeli spying is indisputable. Israel always features prominently in the annual FBI report called "Foreign Economic Collection and Industrial Espionage." The 2005 report states, "Israel has an active program to gather proprietary information within the United States. These collection activities are primarily directed at obtaining information on military systems and advanced computing applications that can be used in Israel’s sizable armaments industry." It adds that Israel recruits spies, uses electronic methods, and carries out computer intrusion to gain the information. The 2005 report concluded that the thefts eroded US military advantage, enabling foreign powers to obtain expensive technologies that had taken years to develop.

A 1996 Defense Investigative Service report noted that Israel has great success stealing technology by exploiting the numerous co-production projects that it has with the Pentagon. "Placing Israeli nationals in key industries …is a technique utilized with great success." A General Accounting Office (GAO) examination of espionage directed against American defense and security industries described how Israeli citizens residing in the US had stolen sensitive technology to manufacture artillery gun tubes, obtained classified plans for a reconnaissance system, and passed sensitive aerospace designs to unauthorized users. An Israeli company was caught monitoring a Department of Defense telecommunications system to obtain classified information, while other Israeli entities targeted avionics, missile telemetry, aircraft communications, software systems, and advanced materials and coatings used in missile re-entry. The GAO concluded that Israel "conducts the most aggressive espionage operation against the United States of any US ally." In June 2006, a Pentagon administrative judge overruled an appeal by an Israeli who had been denied a security clearance, stating, "The Israeli government is actively engaged in military and industrial espionage in the United States. An Israeli citizen working in the US who has access to proprietary information is likely to be a target of such espionage." More recently, FBI counter intelligence officer John Cole has reported how many cases of Israeli espionage are dropped under orders from the Justice Department. He provides a "conservative estimate" of 125 worthwhile investigations into Israeli espionage involving both American citizens and Israelis that were stopped due to political pressure from above.

Two recent stories that have been reported in the Israeli media but are strangely absent from the news on this side of the Atlantic demonstrate exactly what is going on and what is at stake. The first story confirms that Israeli efforts to obtain US technology are ongoing. Stewart David Nozette, a US government scientist who was arrested on October 19, 2009 in an FBI sting operation after offering to spy for Israel has been waiting in jail to go to trial on espionage charges. New documents in the case were presented in the Federal court in Washington last week. The documents confirm that Nozette was a paid consultant for Israeli Aerospace Industries (IAI) and it is believed that he passed to them classified material in return for an estimated $225,000 in consulting fees. Examination of his computer by the FBI revealed that he was planning a "penetration of NASA" the US space agency and that he was also trying to crack into other scientists’ computers to obtain additional classified material. Other documents demonstrate that he was cooperating with two Israeli scientists who were administrators with IAI, Yossi Weiss and Yossi Fishman. Nozette made several trips to Israel without reporting them, which he was required to do because of his high security clearance. The FBI reportedly also has incriminating letters and other documents that were obtained from the computer.

The second story relates to the pending sale of twenty-five F-35 fighter planes to Israel. The F-35 is one of the most advanced fighter planes in the world. The $130 million planes would be purchased with US military assistance money, which means they would effectively be a gift from the US taxpayer. But Israel is balking at the sale reportedly because it wants to install some of its own local content in the aircraft. The Pentagon has already made some concessions but is disinclined to grant approval for all the changes because to do so would require giving the Israelis full access to the plane’s advanced avionics and computer systems. Israel also wants to independently maintain the aircraft, which would also require access to all systems. It would be nice to think that the Pentagon wants to keep the maintenance in American hands to preserve jobs, but the Defense Department has never cared about US workers before when the issue is Israel, and the real reason for the standoff is that Lockheed-Martin and the Pentagon both know that Israel will steal whatever it can if it gains access. It would then use the technology to market its own products at a price below that of US defense contractors. The result would be a triple whammy for Uncle Sam: the expensive planes are given to Israel free, the technology is then stolen, and future sales vanish as our Israeli friends market their knock down versions of weapons systems reliant on the stolen technology.

So to David Brooks I would say that there is most definitely an economic surge taking place in high tech Israel, but it is less a miracle than the fruit of a long series of thefts and manipulations fueled by American tax money and the connivance of a Congress that is always willing to do favors for the country that it appears to love beyond all others. I’m sure most Americans would wish the Israelis well and would applaud the prosperity that derives from their own industry and inventiveness but it is also time to put the brakes on business as usual and to take the Israeli hand out of our pocket. I’m sure Brooks’ job is pretty secure and well paid, but many Americans are out of work and suffering, so let’s take some steps to protect our economy from the information thieves from Tel Aviv and keep our money and jobs over here.

Will Israel Attack Iran?

By RONEN BERGMAN, January 25, 2012, The NY Times

As the Sabbath evening approached on Jan. 13,Ehud Barak paced the wide living-room floor of his home high above a street innorth Tel Aviv, its walls lined with thousands of books on subjects rangingfrom philosophy and poetry to military strategy. Barak, the Israeli defenseminister, is the most decorated soldier in the country’s history and one of itsmost experienced and controversial politicians. He has served as chief of thegeneral staff for the Israel Defense Forces, interior minister, foreignminister and prime minister. He now faces, along with Prime Minister BenjaminNetanyahu and 12 other members of Israel’s inner security cabinet, the mostimportant decision of his life — whether to launch a pre-emptive attack againstIran. We met in the late afternoon, and our conversation — the first of severalover the next week — lasted for two and a half hours, long past nightfall.“This is not about some abstract concept,” Barak said as he gazed out at thelights of Tel Aviv, “but a genuine concern. The Iranians are, after all, anation whose leaders have set themselves a strategic goal of wiping Israel offthe map.”


When I mentioned to Barak the opinion voicedby the former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and the former chief of staff GabiAshkenazi — that the Iranian threat was not as imminent as he and Netanyahuhave suggested and that a military strike would be catastrophic (and that they,Barak and Netanyahu, were cynically looking to score populist points at theexpense of national security), Barak reacted with uncharacteristic anger. Heand Netanyahu, he said, are responsible “in a very direct and concrete way forthe existence of the State of Israel — indeed, for the future of the Jewishpeople.” As for the top-ranking military personnel with whom I’ve spoken whoargued that an attack on Iran was either unnecessary or would be ineffective atthis stage, Barak said: “It’s good to have diversity in thinking and for peopleto voice their opinions. But at the end of the day, when the military commandlooks up, it sees us — the minister of defense and the prime minister. When welook up, we see nothing but the sky above us.”

READ more at 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/29/magazine/will-israel-attack-iran.html

Israel's silence on Iran is deafening

by: John Lyons, Middle East Correspondent, The Australian

January 28, 2012 12:00AM

JUST before 10 am on Tuesday, something highly unusual happened. Seventeen foreign journalists were escorted into one of the most secure facilities in Israel - the Kirya military base in Tel Aviv.

When Israel is at war, this sprawling compound serves as the command centre.

We were taken into a secured room inside the main tower. Right on 10 o'clock, in walked one of the the most important figures in Israel's defence and security establishment.

We cannot name him, that was the condition of this rare briefing, but we can quote him as a "senior security source" or such like.

Some may see these briefings as further attempts to manipulate journalists.

Indeed, many of those in the room, from outlets including The New York Times, Reuters and the BBC, were in some sense cynical. The material presented was obviously authorised, not leaked documents that the IDF did not want published.

Inevitably, there was an element of spin to it all.

But there were also valuable insights into how Israel sees the changing Middle East and what it may be planning.

Perhaps the most important insight was the official's refusal to discuss Iran.

Iran's nuclear program is clearly the most urgent and serious challenge that Israel faces. The official presented us with a series of slides, one of which described Iran as "an existential threat" to Israel.

One journalist became irritated when the official would not take questions on Iran.

The journalist argued that if the official was going to say Iran was an existential threat then surely questions should be taken about it.

But one of the several military officers sitting in the room quickly announced that no questions would be taken on Iran - it was clearly too sensitive an issue.

The official who gave the briefing is likely to be engaged in a momentous decision in coming months about whether Israel launches military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.

The boasts by Iran's leadership that it will "wipe Israel off the map" give Israel a legitimate reason to fear Iran becoming a nuclear power.

As The New York Times noted recently, while the debate about sanctions continues "the centrifuges keep spinning".

One slide showed weapons movements around the Middle East. The map was based on Israeli intelligence assessments, and, like all intelligence assessments, they need to be taken with caution. But much of what they highlighted rings true.

The map showed a significant movement of weapons into Gaza. This is consistent with the view of one European country, as expressed recently to The Weekend Australian, that many weapons leaving Libya have been finding their way into Gaza through the Sinai in Egypt.

The Israeli official then discussed the region, country by country, and how Israel saw it.

Egypt: "Still under a military regime, but slowly moving towards democracy."

Despite the Muslim Brotherhood emerging as the big winners in the parliamentary elections, the Israeli military continues to deal directly with the Egyptian military.

The Sinai is increasingly falling under the control of Bedouin gangs, and is among Israel's biggest concerns.

Syria: President Bashar al-Assad is "bleeding to death".

Israel does not know what will replace the embattled President's regime and estimates more than 6000 civilians and up to 2000 security forces have been killed since the Syrian uprising began last March.

Israel is preparing for refugees on its border with Syria, which it will try to manage with UN officials in the demilitarised zone.

Lebanon: Hezbollah, which has "a significant military capacity", continues to consolidate power.

Iran: it is leading "the radical camp" and the source of many of the weapons finding their way into Gaza, particularly through Sudan.

Gaza: After two years of "relative quiet" Hamas, and even more so the Islamic Jihad, are increasing the number of rockets fired into Israel.

The official made clear Israel would have no hesitation in engaging in another Gaza war if "dragged in" by Hamas's continuation of rocket fire.

Israel's current assessment held there was currently "a low likelihood" of an "initiated" military campaign against Israel.

That is particularly significant: it means Israel understands that, despite Hezbollah having some 40,000 missiles in Lebanon near the border, it does not expect them to be used in the near future.

That may change should Israel strike Iran and Tehran urge Hezbollah, its Shia ally, to retaliate.

One of the most interesting features of the briefing was how low the Palestinian issue rates for Israel.

The official noted that the Palestinian Authority was doing "a good job" in security in the West Bank but, clearly, given the divisions between Hamas and Fatah, which rules the West Bank, Israel does not expect to be sitting opposite a united Palestinian negotiating team any time soon.

SOURCE: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/world-politics/israels-silence-on-iran-is-deafening/story-fn9hkofv-1226255662529

Letter to the Woodstock Times

To the editor:

We recently attended the Modern Language Association conference in Seattle, where we took part in a number of discussions inspired by the Arab Spring. Throughout the conference there was a high level of excitement and of admiration for all the struggling, freedom-loving people of the Middle East and North Africa. This movement, carried out for over a year by the ordinary people of Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, and a number of other countries, including Syria and Palestine, has fired the imagnations of the world and helped spark a popular uprising against economic and social injustice in the USA. With these connections in mind, we returned to Woodstock with a renewed sense of purpose and solidarity.

Imagine our dismay, then, on opening the Woodstock Times to the diatribe by Susan Puretz against MECR, an organization of which we are proud members, and against anyone who dares criticize Israel while "neglecting" to speak out against the Assad regime in Syria. Ms. Puretz' attack is both inaccurate and misleading!

Her letter is inaccurate in claiming that MECR members do not care about the struggle against Assad. MECR members have protested and continue to protest the murderous brutality of the Syrian regime, just as we protest against all brutality and repression everywhere, whether in Syria, in Egypt, in Tunisia, or in Palestine or in the USA. The fact that we focus on the brutal and violent repression and killing of Palestinians, who are simply trying to live their lives in peace with justice, by the IDF and the Jewish settlers in the Occupied Territories of Palestine, is logically and morally tied to the worldwide struggle for human rights.

Ms.Puretz is also misleading in that she relies on a specious line of argument, popular among unthinking "knee-jerk" supporters of the Netanyahu/Barak regime, which poses outrageous and false alternatives. The line that asks "Why don't you protest against ----- instead of criticizing Israel?' is a classic red herring. This is the logical fallacy that proposes we redirect our attention to something new away from the subject at hand. It also uses the related fallacy of the "excluded middle": either we support the Syrian people or we support the Palestinians. The middle position -- that we support both and equally criticize the Syrian and Israeli regimes -- becomes a non-possibility. The writer wants to force us up against the wall and into categories of her own making -- or rather of the making of Israeli propagandists over the course of the last generation. Ms. Puretz is consciously or unconsciously attempting to provoke us, while continuing to believe she is right!

This reminds us of a story of a husband who comes home early from work to find his wife in bed with another man. The suprised wife blurts out,"Why did you come home so early?" The husband furiously snaps, "Why do you have another man in our bed?" The wife calmly replies, "I asked you first...Don't change the subject!" In a sense, Israel and its supporters, like Ms. Puretz, ask the Palestinians, "Why are you so angry with us?"....While the Palestinians ask Israel, "Why are you illegally occupying our land, building walls and checkpoints,demolishing our homes, building new settlements ,confiscating our olive trees, and killing our people?" And Israel replies, "Don't change the subject, I asked you FIRST!"

To Ms. Puretz' arguments we say NO! They conceal the truth. The same UN to which Puretz refers has not only condemned the Syrian government. It has for over 40 years continued to call upon Israel to end its violent and illegal occupation of Palestinian land and to stop building settlements there in contravention of the Geneva Treaties. There is only one law for the weak and the strong, the oppressor and the oppressed. Moral indignation does not stop at the borders of Israel -- or at those of the United States, which has maintained a hands-off policy with regard to both the protestors in Syria and the Palestinian masses, while continuing to pour billions in money and weapons into Israel. Most of the world, including the best and brightest of our own country, recognizes these simple truths.

Perhaps Ms. Puretz should find out why. To us, it's a no-brainer!

Barry Fruchter Amber Rose members of Middle East Crisis Response (MECR)
Woodstock NY

New Book 'Palestinians In Israel' Explores The Contradiction Of The ‘Jewish And Democratic’ State

by Ben White on January 21, 2012 24;mondoweiss.net

More and more, thediscrimination and repression faced by Israel’s Palestinian citizens issurfacing in the mainstream, through media reports and alarmed NGO briefings.The stories just keep on coming: this week, Arab Knesset Members like HaneenZoabi were accused of treachery, and threatened with expulsion from the Knessetand criminal proceedings (the ‘crime’ was to meet with the PalestinianLegislative Council speaker in the West Bank, a Hamas politician).

Then there was the HighCourt’s rejection of an appeal against the Citizenship Law which separatesPalestinian families where one spouse has Israeli citizenship and the other isfrom the Occupied Territories. Praise for the ruling came from hard-liners and‘liberals’ alike, and was explicitly framed as a victory in the battle tomaintain a ‘Jewish majority’.

The various laws andproposed laws that have emerged in recent years – like the targeting of Nakbacommemoration or the official legalisation of ‘selection committees’ inhundreds of communities – are laying bare a systematic pattern ofdiscrimination that has been present since 1948. From the years of militaryrule over Palestinian citizens (which did not technically end until 1966), tothe demolition of homes in an-Naqab (the Negev) in 2012, the aim has been thesame: to ensure Jewish privilege and control over the indigenous Palestinians.

The mainstreaming of acritique of the occupation – and in particular, the settlements, or the actionsin ‘Operation Cast Lead’ – has been undoubtedly beneficial, but has often beenaccompanied by an affirmation that Israel is, for all its ‘mistakes’, a beaconof democracy. This routine endorsement of Israel’s “democracy” goes hand inhand with a taboo on questioning Israel as a ‘Jewish state’, a juxtapositionthat points towards the tension in Western liberal support for a state ofaffairs many would consider appalling in other circumstances.

Israel only has a ‘Jewishmajority’ because of the expulsion and legislated dispossession ofPalestinians. Israeli policies with regards to land, housing, immigration, andbudgets, explicitly and implicitly favour Jewish citizens (and even Jewishnon-citizens) at the expense of Palestinian citizens (and those Palestiniansstill excluded from their homeland).

This is the reality I haveattempted to highlight in my new book, Palestiniansin Israel: Segregation, Discrimination and Democracyhttp://palestiniansinisrael.wordpress.com/ (which I’m thrilled to say comeswith a foreword by MK Haneen Zoabi). This is what Israel advocacy groups don’twant to talk about: the truth behind the myth of a ‘Jewish and democratic’state, and how that contradiction is at the heart of the conflict.

Newspaper Editor: Israel Should Consider Assassinating Obama

Andrew Adler, the owner andpublisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly newspaper servingAtlanta's Jewish community, devoted his January 13, 2012 column to the thornyproblem of the U.S. and Israel's diverging views on the threat posed by Iran.Basically Israel has three options, he wrote: Strike Hezbollah and Hamas,strike Iran, or "ordera hit" on Barack Obama. Either way, problem solved!

Here's how Adler laid out"option three" in his list of scenarios facing Israeli presidentBenjamin Netanyahu (the column, which was forwarded to us by a tipster, isn'tonline, but you can read acopy here):

Three, give the go-ahead for U.S.-based Mossad agents totake out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vicepresident to take his place, and forcefully dictate that the United States'policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies.

Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on apresident in order to preserve Israel's existence. Think about it. If I havethought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don't you think that this almostunfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel's most inner circles?

Another way of putting "three" in perspective goessomething like this: How far would you go to save a nation comprised of sevenmillion lives...Jews, Christians and Arabs alike?

You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are onthe table.

It's hard to tell whetheror not Adler is just some crank. But the Atlanta Jewish Times, whichhe purchased in 2009, appears to be a realcommunity newspaper. It was founded in 1925 and, according to Wikipedia, claims a circulation of 3,500 and staff of five. To judgefrom its web site, it's a going concern.

A nervous Adler told meover the phone that he wasn't advocating Obama's assassination by Mossadagents. "Of course not," he said.
But do you think Israelshould consider it an option? "No."
But do you believe thatIsrael is in fact considering the option in its most inner circles? "No.Actually, no. I was hoping to make clear that it's unspeakable—god forbid thiswould ever happen. I take it you're quoting me?"
Yes. "Oh, boy."
When I asked Adler why, ifhe didn't advocate assassination and didn't believe Israel was actuallyconsidering it, he wrote a column saying he believed that the option was"on the table," he asked for a minute to compose himself and call meback. He did a few moments later, and said, "I wrote it to see what kindof reaction I was going to get from readers."
And what was the reaction?"We've gotten a lot of calls and emails."
Nothing from the SecretService, though. Yet.

UPDATE: Adler has told JTA that he"regrets" the column and plans to publish an apology. Oh, and the Secret Service says it will "make allappropriate, investigative follow-up in regard to this matter," according to ABC News.
Source: Gawker, 1/20/2012,http://gawker.com/5877892/

Gaza Youth Hear About Israel Lobby’s Role

by Yousef M. Aljamal on January 19, 2012, mondoweiss.net 

Ali Abu Nima addresses CPDS via Skype Jan. 15, 2012

For the second week in arow, the Center for Political Development Studies holds a video link on therole of the Zionist lobby in US elections. Ali Abunimah, the founder of TheElectronic Intifada, joined Gaza activists via Skype and emphasized the reasonsfor this "unshakable" relation between Israel and the US, which isknown to Palestinians more than any other nation in the world.

"The reason of thiswould be briefly put up into two theories. Some people say Israel plays animportant role in U.S imperialism, in allowing it to control the Middle Eastand its resources. Meanwhile, there are other people (theory) that say thereare powerful organizations and networks that consider support for Israel veryimportant and they influence the politics of the United States throughelections and contributions to political campaigns to make candidates adopt toIsrael's position," he emphasized.

Still, America is a countryof institutions and it has its own political interests, so that no one can sayIsrael controls all walks of life there, or it gets its way to everything itwants.
"We have seen ahistorical battle in the United States over the role of Israel and the Israelilobby and it's focus on Iran more than Palestine, where there is a lot ofpressure from pro-Israel groups to take a very hard line towards Iran and evento launch a war against it. Some of these battles are taking place behind thescenes. There is a growing feeling in the United States that Israel is turninginto a burden and a problem for the United States. That’s why America isfavoring a diplomatic solution to this issue. The is an emerging idea thatIsrael and US interests are not identical and conflict with each other,"he added.

General David Petraeus wasquoted, saying the activities of Israel are making the position of the USharder. There is a conflict about the value of Israel to the United States, andthe Israel lobby is worried about this and they are fighting to maintain theidea that Israel and the United States have the same interests.

"Palestinians are fewin number, though they take an important place in the primary elections, whichasserts the role of the Zionist lobby. A candidate called Palestinians invented[people] while another went further by saying they never existed at all,"Abunimah clarified.

This happens while millionsof people in the US are jobless and the country is going through crisis. Someanalysts shed light on the unusual rise of the Republican nominee Ron Paul, whobelieves in pulling US forces out of military bases all around the world.

"The very unique andpublic thing about him is that he said he wants to cut aid to Israel to zero.What I think is that he is not going to be the Republican candidate and he hashis own reasons to believe in this. The message is that many voters voted forhim, though he says he wants to cut aid to Israel. They don't care enough aboutIsrael and this does not mean they are pro-Palestine," he continued."An indication that politics is changing in the U.S."

There has been anincreasing political marriage between supporters of Israel and extremeIslamophobia in the U.S., particularly after September 11th. They did theirbest to make use of the attacks to spread the Israeli propaganda.

"On September 12th,Benjamin Netanyahu, who was in opposition in Israel at the time, said to TNTnewspaper 'I think the attack was very good,' but he corrected himself later bysaying 'It's good for Americans to understand the terrorism we face,'"Abunimah noted.

"Islamophobia was verybeneficial to Israel in the short run, but in the long run, it will backfire onIsrael. The reason is that there is a change in the character of support forIsrael in the last 30 years. In the past, all parties, leftist or rightist,used to support Israel. Nowadays, things are changing," he disclosed.

"In the short run,this is not in our interest, for the world is turning to the right, but in thelong run, things will be in our favor, especially among young people in Europewho are pushing towards universal and open politics. They are interested inequality and understanding. More and more young people are attracted to thekind of politics that oppose this kind of domination and racism. We see that alot of pro-Israel groups in the US are worried about this. They teach youngpeople about Israel and organize trips to Israel to show how wonderful Israelis. The next election will bring the most Islamophobic and anti-Palestinianpeople. But later, things will change to the favor of Palestinians,"Abunimah added.

Abdel Aziz Duaik, Palestinian Parliament Speaker For Hamas, Reportedly Arrested By Israeli Soldiers

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Hamas officials say the speaker of the Palestinian parliament has been arrested by Israeli soldiers.

A Hamas official said Abdel Aziz Duaik was arrested Thursday near Ramallah. He was speaking on condition of anonymity citing security reasons.

The Israeli military had no comment.

The Palestinian parliament has not functioned since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 from the rival Palestinian Fatah Party.

Since then the Western backed Fatah governs the West Bank while Hamas rules Gaza.

Israel, the U.S., EU and others list Hamas as a terror group due to its suicide bombings and other attacks aimed at Israeli civilians that killed hundreds.

Duaik was arrested along with other Hamas officials in 2006 after militants abducted an Israeli soldier. He was released in 2009.

Huffington Post 1/18/2012