In a text message to reporters, Hamas blamed Fatah for the shooting, which came two days after three children of a Fatah-allied intelligence officer were killed.

"This is an ugly crime committed against one of the field commanders of Hamas' military wing and one of the prominent figures in Hamas," Hamas spokesperson Fauzi Barhoum said.

"Hamas is not going to forget the blood of its members. It is going to pursue and bring to justice those who were involved in today's crime."

A Fatah representative has denied any responsibility for the shooting, which took place outside the courthouse in the southern town of Khan Younis.

Witnesses said four gunmen forced al-Fara to his knees when he got out of a taxi and shot him on the sidewalk, which was riddled with bulletholes.

The incident dims hopes for a unity government between Fatah and Hamas, which won a parliamentary election earlier this year.

Moderate President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah and the Islamic militant Hamas have been locked in a power struggle since Hamas ousted Fatah in parliamentary elections. More than 40 Gazans have died in battles between the two groups since Hamas took power in March.

The study, "Environmental Consequences of Regional Nuclear Conflicts ", unveiled this week at a meeting in San Fancisco, concludes that even a limited nuclear war would trigger enough massive fires and throw enough smoke plumes into the stratosphere to result in "long-lasting, global climate effects." This global cooling would have a profound effect on agricultural production on every continent. The authors conclude that even a "tiny" nuclear exchange would produce "climate changes unprecedented in recorded human history."

Could it be that the U.S.-India nuke deal is just the first stage of a devilishly brilliant plan by the Bush Administration to finally address global warming?

When he emerged from a taxi, three of the men grabbed him and forced him onto his knees, while the fourth pulled out a weapon and shot him. The attack left the sidewalk riddled with bullet holes. The witnesses declined to be identified, fearing for their safety.

Dozens gathered at the scene and Palestinian security officers set up roadblocks. Hamas militants set up their own roadblocks throughout town, searching for the shooters.

In a statement faxed to reporters, Hamas openly accused what it called a Fatah "death squad" of the killing.

Fauzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman, gave no further details about Mr. al-Fara's militant activities but pledged to hunt down the killers.

"This is an ugly crime committed against one of the field commanders of Hamas' military wing and one of the prominent figures in Hamas," Mr. Barhoum said. "The fingers that shot him are the same fingers that were involved in the killing of previous Hamas leaders. "Hamas is not going to forget the blood of its members. It is going to pursue and bring those who were involved in today's crime to justice."

Fatah spokesman Tawfik Abu Khoussa rejected the accusations.

"We condemn all acts of anarchy, whatever may be behind them. We call on the brothers in Hamas to stop firing accusations before the investigation," he said.

Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said from Sudan that he would cut short a foreign trip and return to Gaza.

When Mr. Haniyeh left on Nov. 28, he planned to travel for a month. That drew criticism because of the need to conclude negotiations with Fatah on a new government and the political violence raging in the Palestinian territories.

"We need the prime minister to be here now to resolve the internal problems," Mr. Haniyeh's political adviser, Ahmed Youssef, said in Gaza on Wednesday.

But Mr. Haniyeh dismissed fears of the violence in Gaza escalating to a civil war.

"We want to assure you that words such as 'civil war' don't exist in our dictionary. They don't exist in our makeup, in our culture," Mr. Haniyeh told reporters in Khartoum.

Fatah officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk to the press, alleged that Mr. al-Fara had been involved in previous attacks against Fatah members.

About 1,000 Fatah loyalists, about half of them uniformed security personnel, marched through Gaza from their headquarters to the residence of moderate President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah.

National Security Service Maj. Othman Shalouf, 39, said Abbas, known familiarly as Abu Mazen, should act to halt the downward spiral in public order.

"We tell Abu Mazen the time has come to exercise your powers and stop this farce. We are security agencies able to control things and we need a political decision from you," he said.

Some of the protesters fired in the air, but there were no clashes with Hamas militiamen whom they passed on their route. One demonstrator called to the Hamas men through a loudspeaker, appealing for peace.

"We call on you to make today the last day Palestinian blood is shed," he said.

Students of the Mr. al-Azhar Islamic university joined the procession, carrying pictures of the three boys killed on Monday, as well as Fatah security men killed in internal clashes.

Fatah and Hamas have been locked in a power struggle since Hamas ousted Fatah in parliamentary elections. More than 40 Gazans have died in battles between the two groups since Hamas took power in March.

Seeking to end the standoff, Mr. Abbas has been trying to persuade Hamas to join Fatah in a national unity government. But the talks broke down late last month. Tensions heightened after Mr. Abbas announced plans over the weekend to call early elections, drawing Hamas accusations that he is plotting a coup.

Ten radical Palestinian groups based in Syria said Wednesday that they also rejected the proposal for early presidential and legislative elections. The groups, which include Hamas, issued a statement in Damascus saying such polls would "create excessive tension and division" and calling instead for renewed talks to form a government of national unity.

The latest round of violence was sparked by Monday's killing of the three children of Baha Balousheh, an intelligence officer and Fatah loyalist who helped lead a crackdown on Hamas a decade ago. Mr. Balousheh, who was not in the car, escaped two previous Hamas assassination attempts.

Hamas denied involvement in Monday's killing.

Large protests broke out in several Palestinian cities in the West Bank and Gaza on Tuesday. Six people were wounded by gunfire, according to hospital officials.

Three times yesterday, at a joint press conference with the German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, Mr Olmert resorted to a well-tried formulation of Israel's "nuclear ambiguity" by declaring: "Israel won't be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons into the Middle East."

But the episode, officially the result of a "misunderstanding" of Mr Olmert's earlier words, left some analysts and politicians wondering whether it had been a more deliberate, if subliminal, attempt to ratchet up pressure on Iran to abandon its own nuclear ambitions by warning that Israel was capable of responding.

Mr Olmert had said on German television: "We have never threatened any nation with annihilation. Iran, openly, explicitly and publicly threatens to wipe Israel off the map. Can you say this is the same level, when they are aspiring to have nuclear weapons, as America, France, Israel, Russia?"

The Prime Minister's office insisted yesterday that Mr Olmert was listing "responsible" nations, not ones with nuclear weapons.

Israel has long refused to say whether it had nuclear weapons despite international recognition that it does. The "ambiguity" policy is seen here as allowing Israel to maintain its deterrent without stimulating a Middle East arms race.

The clock is ticking, yet no one wishes to hear it. The countdown to a nuclear Iran has begun, and with each passing day the nightmare scenario draws ever closer to becoming a reality.

In just a few months' time, if all goes according to plan, the tyrant of Teheran will preside over a celebration of terrifying, and history-altering, significance.

His goal, as he has stated repeatedly in recent weeks, is to complete the installation of thousands of centrifuges, the devices used to enrich uranium, by the end of March 2007.

This will give the ayatollahs the ability to start producing nuclear weapons, and to spread nuclear terror far and wide, threatening the existence not only of Israel, but of Western civilization itself.

The would-be Hitler of Persia has already made it abundantly clear that he plans to wipe Israel and its millions of Jews off the map. And last week he told Western leaders that their turn would soon be next: "If you do not respond to the divine call," he warned, "you will die soon and vanish from the face of the earth."

Three months. That's all we've got. That's all that stands right now between the world as we know it, and one in which the Persian executioner will be able to put his finger on the nuclear button.

This can not be allowed to happen. The danger is too great, the peril is too real.

Now is the time for all those who love Israel to stand up and be counted. Now is the time for pro-Israel Christians everywhere, and especially in the US, to rise up and cry out on behalf of God's people.

Storm the heavens with your prayers, and the White House with your pleas. Speak out now and urge US President George W. Bush to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat once and for all.

BY NOW it should be clear: Nothing less than US military action is going to deter Teheran from pursuing its nuclear goals. Threats of sanctions and finger-wagging have failed to do the job.

Europe is hopelessly weak and conciliatory, and the United Nations is completely inept. There is one man, and one man alone, whom God has put in a position to stop Iran, and that man's name is George W. Bush.

But the president is under attack, as the media and his critics do their utmost to tear him down. They hate him and everything he stands for, and will stop at nothing to spoil his remaining time in office.

The president is a good man, and a man of faith. He knows what needs to be done; but like any leader, he also needs to hear from those who put him in office.

And that, dear Christians, is where you come in to play.

With your size and your influence, and yes, with your faith, it is you who can make a difference at this critical juncture for Israel and the West.

Many of my fellow Jews in the US are largely silent, afraid to be seen as leading the charge. It is as if they learned nothing from the Jewish people's horrific experience in Europe over six decades ago, when silence in America made possible extermination across the sea.

But you know better than that, and you are not afraid.

On issues that you care about, you have demonstrated an impressive ability to affect US policy, mustering the passion and power necessary to shape debate. Now, more than ever, is the time to do so again, for the threat to us all is very, very real.

Flood the White House and Congress with your concerns. Let them know that you fear for Israel and its safety. Urge your elected officials to hit Iran hard, and soon. Not merely with criticism, but with bombs as well.

Because unless the US Air Force goes into action, the mullahs of Teheran will jeopardize everything we hold dear.

Israel, as you know, is the "apple of His eye" (see Deut. 32:10 and Zech. 2:12). And G-d has made clear in His Scripture what He expects from people of faith at times such as these, when Israel is in danger.

"You who make mention of the L-rd," says the prophet Isaiah (Chap. 62: 6-7), "do not keep silent, and give Him no rest until He establishes and until He makes Jerusalem unto a praise in the earth."

"Pray for the peace of Jerusalem," says the Psalmist, in Psalm 122. "They that love thee shall prosper."

These aren't just guidelines or recommendations from books of old. They are a command to each and every one of us, Jew and Christian alike, to stand up and speak out when Israel is under threat.

I have no doubt, not one iota of disbelief, that G-d will save His people Israel. Deliverance comes from Him, and Him alone. But each of us must do our part to help bring it about.

And you, dear Christians, now have the power, and the opportunity, to do so. To move the president's heart, and to save Israel and the West from a truly diabolical fate.

So please, don't tarry - we dare not delay. The clock is winding down, the alarm bells are ringing. Raise your voices in prayer and supplication. The time to do something is now, and there is not a moment to waste.

--- from my column in the December 13 Jerusalem Post

Airport managers believed that if they allowed the addition of an 8-foot-tall menorah to the display, as Seattle Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky had requested, they would also have to display symbols of other religions and cultures, which was not something airport workers had time for during the busiest travel season of the year, Airport Director Mark Reis said earlier Monday.

Port officials received word Monday afternoon that Bogomilsky's organization would not file a lawsuit at this time over the placement of a menorah, Davis said in a statement.

"Given that, the holiday trees will be replaced as quickly as possible," he said.

Davis added that the rabbi "never asked us to remove the trees; it was the port's decision based on what we knew at the time."

There were no immediate plans to display a menorah, airport spokesman Bob Parker said, saying restoration of the trees was expected to take place overnight Monday.

"A key element in moving forward will be to work with the rabbi and other members of the community to develop a plan for next year's holiday decorations at the airport," the port statement said.

The rabbi has also offered to give the port an electric menorah to display, said his lawyer, Harvey Grad.

"We are not going to be the instrument by which the port holds Christmas hostage," Grad said, emphasizing the rabbi never sought removal of the trees, but addition of the menorah.

The rabbi had received "all kinds of calls and emails," many of them "odious," Grad said, adding he was "trying to figure out how this is consistent with the spirit of Christmas."

Thirteen trees had sat above foyers that lead outside to the airport drive. The largest tree, which Reis estimated to be 15 or 20 feet tall, was placed in a large lobby near baggage claim for international arrivals.

After the removal, some airline workers decorated ticketing counters with their own miniature Christmas trees.

Customer service agents with Frontier Airlines pooled their money Monday morning to buy four 1-foot-high Christmas trees, which they placed on the airline's ticketing counter. Atop a Delta counter, workers put up a tree several feet tall.

The airlines lease space for ticket counters from the airport, and can display trees there if they want, Reis said.

We get into flame wars, which I generally don't bother AlterNet readers with -- I'm happy to encourage his obscurity. But today, Lublin came out with a hit piece on Jimmy Carter's new book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, and I want to highlight it because it's such a good example of the kind of knee-jerk reaction that can be expected when one asserts that Palestinians may have some legitimate claims.

Lublin admits he didn't read the book, before lighting into it. I haven't read the book either, so I can only look at who he sources in his smear of Carter.

Dennis Ross is one -- he doesn't like Carter's thesis. Ross, Lublin says, is the author of "the most detailed report on [the second Camp David] talks from someone who attended them who was not Israeli or Palestinian." That's true, but as Ann Lesch noted:

Ross ignores the perspectives of other participants in these negotiations. This comes across as breathtaking egotism. Only his own opinions and recollections count; there is no need to double check or cross-check them against the memoirs of others. Thus, although he cites in passing James Baker's The Politics of Diplomacy, Clinton's press secretary George Stephanopoulos' All Too Human, and Israeli ambassador cum Syria specialist Itamar Rabinovich's The Brink of Peace, he fails to comment on or assess their viewpoints. Moreover, one searches in vain for mention of and critiques of the discussion of Middle East issues in George H.W. Bush and Brent Scowcroft's A World Transformed, Bill Clinton's My Life, Warren Christopher's Choices of a Lifetime, and Madeleine Albright's Madam Secretary: A Memoir, much less articles by his fellow diplomats Martin Indyk, Daniel Kurtzer, Rob Malley, Aaron David Miller, and Edward (Ned) Walker. The result is a version of history that privileges not only an American perspective but one specific perspective: his own. [Read more of her critique here].

And while David presents Ross as just an impartial observer -- dismissing Carter's claim that "representatives of Jewish organizations who would be unlikely to visit the occupied territories" were the leading critics of his book -- he skips over the fact that Ross is currently Director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a hawkish Israeli-American think-tank started by Martin Indyk (himself a former research director for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee).

Ross's colleagues at WINEP are Joshua Muravchik, who recently wrote that "WE MUST bomb Iran," Indyk, Martin Kramer, a neo-McCarthyite who writes for the National Review and David Horowitz's Frontpage Mag (and is a supporter of Campus-Watch and an advocate of HR 3077) and Moshe Ya'alon, a former IDF Chief of Staff, briefly wanted in Australia for war crimes, who's famous for his claim that "The Palestinian threat harbors cancer-like attributes that have to be severed."

As rightweb notes, "WINEP aims to cultivate close ties among senior military officials in the United States and Israel, as well as in Turkey and Jordan..."

When he's not working his regular Fox News gig, Ross is also the first chairman of a new Jerusalem-based think tank called the Institute for Jewish People Policy Planning, which is funded by ... yup, the Israeli government.

And, of course, Ross was pivotal in reshaping U.S. policy towards the ME under Reagan when he served under Paul Wolfowitz -- then the State Department's Director of Policy Planning -- with Lewis Libby, Francis Fukuyama, Alan Keyes and Zalmay Khalilzad.

Did I mention he is on the Advisory Committee of Scooter Libby's Legal Defense Trust?

So, yeah, Dennis Ross -- who I've seen speak five times and who never failed to make absurdly racist comments about the Palestinians -- is a neutral source.

But the most ironic part of David's smear was citing Alan Dershowitz -- who says legalized torture "is inevitable," as long as the victims are Muslim -- in a post accusing Jimmy Carter of plagiarism. After all, Dershowitz lifted wholesale from Joan Peter's wholly discredited book From Time Immemorial for his polemic, The Case for Israel. That Dershowitz would criticize another book for factual inaccuracies is laughable.

(Lublin also trusts Judith Miller's Jeffrey Goldberg's take on a book he didn't read. I found Goldberg's book, Prisoners, an interesting read, but let's recall that Goldberg also discredited himself completely by swallowing the neocon spin on Iraq hook, line and sinker and becoming one of the invasion's more influential proponents. Goldberg peddled all sorts of easily-debunked conspiracy theories about Saddam's links to al Qaeda in articles embraced by the Bushies as justification for their war. Obviously, that isn't directly related to the topic at hand but it goes to credibility.)

The point here is not to defend a book I haven't read -- Norman Finkelstein, who documented all of the falsehoods and plagiarized bits in Dershowitz's The Case for Israel, also found inaccuracies and "tendentious and untenable interpretations" in Carter's historical chapters, while endorsing the former president's view of the current situation.

The reason I'm responding to Lublin's post is because it is such a good exemple of how the discourse about Israel/ Palestine is framed. Lublin presents Dershowitz and Ross as credible, neutral observers (just as the media does) when they are, obviously, anything but.

The ultimate effect of WINEP's scholars and eliminationists like Dershowitz -- ideologically and institutionally tied not to Israel but to the Israeli right -- is that it creates a false center. To say that the Israel / Palestinian conflict is driven by rejectionists on both sides -- rejectionists who are equally culpable for the current conflict -- is a truly centrist view, but in the U.S. that view is tantamount to "rejecting israel's right to exist," being an anti-Semite or "coddling terrorists." A fair debate is out of bounds.

The effect on U.S. policy is devastating; since the Bush administration came to office, even the appearance of being a neutral broker has been abandoned and there is now intense pressure from Washington on the Palestinians to rein in their rejectionists and absolutely none on the Israelis -- they've been given leave to act unilaterally, ignore commitments made to the U.S. and create facts on the ground that will make any future attempts at a peace process that much more difficult. We didn't get here by accident.

The other thing that stands out is the degree to which the Lublins, Dershowitzes and other hardliners claim to speak on the behalf of Jewish Americans. There's an Israeli right and an Israeli left, and a big part of the U.S.'s dysfunctional ME policy stems from the fact that so many otherwise left-of-center Americans lay down with Israeli reactionaries and believe they're supporting Israel. In fact, they're aligning themselves with Israel's rejectionists and doing their part to extend the conflict. The fact remains that majorities of Israelis and Palestinians endorse some variation of the many proposals falling under the umbrella of "land-for-peace," and that has long been the case.

Anyway, Jimmy Carter was the first American president since FDR to insist on a foreign policy based on Kantian moral imperatives. He wasn't perfect -- far from it -- but he can say what no other former president can: he brokered an Arab-Israeli peace deal that's stood up for three decades. For that alone, he deserves better than to be smeared by someone who didn't read his book, citing nothing but the opinions of vocal voices within the Israel Lobby.

PS: Lublin thinks you're dumb. How else could he write: "Israel, tired of the burdens of occupation, also dearly wants to give up the bulk of its West Bank settlements (the current prime minister, Ehud Olmert, was elected on exactly this platform)..."

Olmert ran on a platform of "realignment" that would have pulled about 60,000 settlers (out of a population of around 300,000) from 72 illegal settlements. David may believe that's "the bulk of" the West Bank settlements, but reasonable people will disagree (more here). Olmert said his plan would "keep significant settlements near Jerusalem, including much of Jerusalem, and other significant parts of the West Bank." The unilateral plan was widely perceived as an attempted land-grab and was even rejected by the Bush administration -- which is saying something -- because it violated a central tenet of Bush's long-dormant "Road Map."

Joshua Holland is a staff writer at Alternet and a regular contributor to The Gadflyer.