Art of Palestinian Resistance in Cyber Warfare
By Don Corder
Perhaps the most infamous poster child for the Zionist and otherworld opposition to having an informed public would be Marie-Antoinette a queen of France. She was the wife of Louis XVI. Louis XVI who was beheaded on January 21, 1793. She was beheaded on October 16, 1793; and was 38. Their son was thrown in prison and pitifully treated; he died at ten in prison; some call him “Louis XVII”.
Professor Robert Faurisson (born January 25, 1929 in Shepperton, Surrey) was esteemed by many to be a respected scholar, yet in September 1989; he was beaten severely by unknown assailants who called themselves “The Sons of the Memory of the Jews.” [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Faurisson]
Faurisson was a Holocaust revisionist who denied the claims and openly stated that the Holocaust was a hoax arising out of a deliberate tool to advance the interest of Jews at the expense of other peoples. Consequently, under the Gayssot Act, a French statute passed in 1990 that prohibited Holocaust denial. [http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF051109.html]
January 24, 2005, the UN General Assembly commemorated the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps. Following this session, a UN resolution was drafted to designate January 27 as the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust. It was through a sleight of hand that the Israeli delegation succeeded in getting this resolution passed and shortly thereafter revisionist Ernst Zündel was handed over by the United States to Canada, then by Canada to Germany where he is now serving a seven year sentence because he took the time to think for himself. [http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF051117.html]
“All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself.” – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (“My Struggle”), Vol. I. According to Robert Faurisson, “They know that to lose the ‘Holocaust’ is to lose the sword and the shield of Israel as well as a formidable instrument of political and financial blackmail.” Genius of the global propaganda machines employed to maintain Israeli power and Palestinian nightmares, can be distilled from what is made available in ordinary sales classes and marketing literature.
It does not matter Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus University of Ulster, December 5, 2005 states, “I’ve checked out the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War and the statement is quite correct – not a single mention of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ’six million’ Jewish victims of the war.” What is important here is recognizing the power of the Holocaust to invoke emotions sufficient enough to move us to a buying decision. Following the example of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, in Der Angriff (The Assault) in 1934 all media, entertainment, handbills and now the Internet are all singularly tasked to the shaping of public opinion. Thus, we embrace, buy into and defend with ‘American Taxpayer Dollars’ Israel’s right to global domination.
Timeless wisdom of Sun Tzu can be a light guiding us into realization of a Palestinian dream if we meticulously consider, “Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple where the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand. Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all! It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.” So, let us here and now therefore consider these as we prepare for warfare in Cyberspace.
Borrowing from the work of Dr. Ralph Nadler author of Breakthrough Thinking, “The Purposes Principle holds that there is never a single purpose in planning or problem solving. Identifying the initial purpose is really only the beginning. Scrutiny and creative thinking reveals a whole hierarchy of purposes that expand the scope of the problem and increases the number of possible solutions. Asking the question “What is the purpose of this purpose?” represents the heart of this principle.” Let me propose that defining and finding ways to bring the Palestinian dreams for their homeland to fruition, be made the achievement of our guiding purpose.
I came to realize certain truths in reality that betrayed evidence of my sometimes naïve fantasies. The Palestinian nightmare does not always allow time and leisure for excursions into the areas of contemplating the beauty of a utopian state inasmuch as they are busy dodging drones, bullets and arrests. So, we who support them can lend our own dreams for now to the cause and understand the reluctance of those Palestinians living here in America, being fearful for the lives of their family over there. Hence, we might herein more seriously consider the experiment of a purposeful society as defined in a speech by the American president Franklin D. Roosevelt, as it being our initial model.
FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT: In our day certain economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. A second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, or race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines throughout the nation. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living. The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom, freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad.
The right of every family to a decent home. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment. The right to a good education. All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward in the implementation of these rights to new goals of human happiness and well-being. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.
Let us not base our Cyber Initiatives upon only our pain but rather let us sell to the world the vision for our children; and the world will engage us. Let us endeavor to employ the heart of a people who live on the global grassroots level, may they realize that even authoritarian governments will bow to the will of the people, politicians check public opinion polls daily and the United Nations will hear our voices. Let us take up the weapon of our warfare skillfully and assert our own agenda as we remember the words of the esteemed sage, “Therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.”
Let us rally with the UN General Assembly in their endorsement of the Goldstone Report as being the focus of our immediate objective. From the Goldstone venue we have the ability to demand “No Credible Goldstone Investigations No International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust.” Hence, we pierce the heart of the serpent behind the foot across our collective necks, through organized initiatives within the domains of social networks and Internet technologies, beginning with linking our diverse networks onto this article.
Bishop Don Corder
Don Corder is presiding bishop for Spirit of Life International Believers Fellowship and Senior Pastor of the Pillar of Truth Ministries. Mr. Corder is a published author, grassroots organizer and community activist, in addition to his work in urban and international development as a business consultant and entrepreneur.
Email: Corder.Donald@yahoo.com
SPY TRADE: How Israel’s Lobby Undermines America’s Economy
By Grant F. Smith
Smith Once Again Exposes Israel Lobby’s Danger to America’s Security and Economy
By Andrew Burroughs
November 1, 2009
This is perhaps Smith’s most important work exposing the deleterious and dangerous influences of the Israeli lobby on both U.S. economic and national security. Smith has devoted several years objectively and thoroughly examining the history of the Israel lobby.
He earlier exposed how domestic political considerations undermined the Justice Department’s valiant efforts to define the lobby as an agent of a foreign power (See Deadly Dogma, Foreign Agents and America’s Defense Line).
As is his practice, Smith is thorough in his research. This latest work is 178 pages, contains more than 300 footnotes, citing more than hundred specific sources including files the FBI only recently declassified.
It is written in a commendably easy to read style, organized into short concise chapters that cover several critical topics including: Israeli arms smuggling; the history of the Israeli Lobby; how the Israeli lobby subverts the investigation of commercial espionage against American firms by Israeli agents; Jonathan Pollard’s treason; the harmful role played by AIPAC in advancing Israeli interests at the expense of the United States. So important is this book that I plan on putting it in my friends’ and family’s Christmas stockings.
Smith systematically demonstrates how since before the establishment of the Israeli state, Zionists abroad and in the United States violated federal laws solely to the advantage of the nascent state regardless of the consequences to American interests. It is this profound contempt for American interest by Zionists in pursing their almost fanatical allegiance to a foreign power that most troubles this reader.
Other writers such as Paul Findley and Mearsheimer have also discussed this danger to American strategic interests and how the “lobby” ensures that all those who challenge its stranglehold on American Congress and the media are publicly attacked, denied employment and marginalized. However, Smith provides an unassailably researched work documenting actual criminal activity. In fact, to this reader’s knowledge, neither Smith’s credibility nor his work’s research has ever been successfully challenged.
The America that Smith paints is a disturbing one. He presents a Congress motivated by lobby money, ignorance, indifference to the interests of the American people and influenced by an false image of Israel as a “David v. Goliath” justifying its systematic violations of U.S. law. Personally, I do not begrudge Israelis from engaging in activities to promote the interests of their home state. What I find disgusting and intolerable is when American citizens actively use political and economic leverage to subvert this country’s own strategic interests solely to the advantage of a foreign power. In my book this is called “treason,” “espionage,” and “betrayal.”
The picture documented by Smith should disturb all patriotic Americans. One truly wonders if this is the America that Washington and Jefferson imagined when they fought our war for independence. Have we substituted one imperial master for another more insidious?
Who can doubt that this country was manipulated into the invading Iraq solely to advance Israeli interests?
Why did Ahmed Chalabi make a secret visit to Israel in 2002 where he declared that the “road to Baghdad lies through Jerusalem!?!”
Was the war against al-Qaida effectively abandoned in Afghanistan to invade Iraq because the “lobby” took advantage of the 911 attack to push for the invasion of Iraq in order to advance Israeli regional interests? Is it only coincidental that al-Qaida has never attacked Israel?
These questions remain to be answered. This reader hopes that Smith will soon apply his demonstrated research and writing abilities to answering these critical questions.
Also See:
SPY TRADE: How Israel’s Lobby Undermines America’s Economy Foreword by Michael Scheuer, former chief, CIA Bin Laden unit
More Helpful Reviews: Spy Trade: How Israel’s Lobby Undermines America’s Economy
Ali Abunimah: Campus BDS Conference keynote speaker
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Ali Abunimah, co-founder of Electronic Intifada and author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse delivers the keynote address at the 2009 Campus BDS Conference at Hampshire College in Amherst, MA.
Netanyahu’s Prayer
Oh God, thank you for giving us the power to continue in our illegal settlements & ethnic cleansing in Palestine.
Oh God, thank you for dealing with Mahmoud Abbas, the so-called “president of Palestine” who still believes that we will bring him “peace” & a “two-state solution”…..
Oh God, thank you for having us succeed in coercing all World leaders (especially European) into accepting our Middle East policy masquerade.
Oh God, please help us keep corrupt Arab leaders in their heavenly seats…..caring about their own wealth & ignoring their peoples’ demands to prosperity, democracy & freedom……
Oh God, please help destroy the Christian & Moslem religions in Jerusalem…….starting with the Aqsa (& later Sakhra) mosques……by the way God, please help us find at least one tiny stone proving that “The Temple” was there………
Oh God, we promise you that after we deal with these Islamic shrines, we will turn to the Church of Nativity…….after all, why do the Christians need it anymore? We got rid of all Palestinian Christians in old Palestine…….the land we now call Israel….
Oh God please help us continue to dupe the Palestinians, the Arabs & the rest of the World that we are spending sleepless nights working for peace in the Middle East & a two-state solution (by the way God, thank you for having our President Obama, who’s speech at Cairo University was so great in convincing Egyptian & Arab youth at Cairo that we are really working for a just Peace)……..we heard that some have believed him????
Oh God, please help our man – Mitchell – and give him the health to continue in his travels over the Middle East, convincing corrupt Arab leaders to give up Palestine & the rights of the Palestinians…..in Palestine or in the diaspora.
Amen
PRESIDENT CLINTON AND NOW OBAMA – WHO THE BLEEP, (actually it was f***) DOES NETANYAHU THINK HE IS?
Alan Hart
Bowen, the BBC’s Middle East editor
It’s not often that stories about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict make me laugh but one by Jeremy Bowen, the BBC’s Middle East editor, did. Because he is the corporation’s correspondent supporters of Israel right or wrong most love to hate – from time to time they pressure the BBC to fire him – I imagine he enjoyed writing it.
In a vivid background report for From Our Own Correspondent, headlined Tough Lessons for Obama on Mid-East peace, Jeremy recalled some of the “false dawns” of previous presidential peace efforts.
One was a trip by President Clinton to Gaza in 1998 when Netanyahu was enjoying his first period as Israel’s prime minister. “Yes”, Jeremy added, “an American president in Gaza. It is not conceivable these days.”
After noting that Netanyahu drove Clinton mad, Jeremy went on:
After he (Netanyahu) had lectured the president about the Middle East, Mr. Clinton famously asked his aides: “Who the (bleep) does he think he is? Who’s the bleeping superpower here?” Only he did not say bleep.
What President Clinton actually said was, “Who the fuck does he think he is? Who’s the fucking superpower here?”
After recalling in his own way how President Obama has been humiliated to date by Netanyahu in his second period as prime minister, Jeremy commented that he, Obama, “might be using Bill Clintonesque language about Mr. Netanyahu.”
My own speculation is that Obama behind closed doors might even be outdoing Clinton in his use of expletives about Netanyahu.
But really there’s no cause for laughter. Tears of rage are more appropriate.
The documented truth, which flows through my book Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews, is that every occupant of the Oval Office has at one point or another, and as President Ford once put it, been made “as mad as hell” by Israeli prime ministers. So the use of presidential expletives to describe them and Zionist lobby leaders at moments of great tension probably has a history going all the way back to Israel’s unilateral declaration of independence.
Even before that there were moments when President Truman could not contain his anger at the tactics Zionists were employing to bend him and the United Nations to their will. At one cabinet meeting Truman blurted out, “Jesus Christ couldn’t please them when he was here, so how could anyone expect that I would have any luck.”
In Memoirs, published long after the events, Truman was very frank about Zionist coercion in the countdown to the twice-postponed General Assembly vote on the partition plan resolution. He wrote:
The facts were that not only were there pressure movements around the United Nations unlike anything that had been seen there before, but the White House too was subjected to a constant barrage. I do not think I ever had as much pressure and propaganda aimed at the White House as I had in this instance. The persistence of a few of the extreme Zionist leaders – actuated by political motives and engaging in political threats – disturbed and annoyed me. Some were even suggesting that we pressure sovereign nations into favourable votes in the General Assembly. I have never approved of the strong imposing their will on the weak whether among men or nations.
As it happened, the campaign of threats to cause a number of sovereign nations to turn their intended “No” to partition votes into “Yes” votes or to abstain was executed by the Zionist lobby with the assistance of a hit-squad of 26 U.S. senators. The whole effort to bend the UN General Assembly to Zionism’s will was co-ordinated by Zionism’s eyes and ears in the White House, David K. Niles. (He once confessed that “had Roosevelt lived, Israel probably would not have become a state.” President Roosevelt was opposed to the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine, and there is a good case for believing, I make it in my book, that if he had lived, he would have used the United Nations to say “No” to Zionism’s colonial enterprise).
When Truman subsequently learned how one sovereign nation in particular, Haiti, had been threatened in his name, he wrote in a memorandum not de-classified until 1971 that “pressure groups (he meant Zionist pressure groups) will succeed in putting the United Nations out of business if this sort of thing is continued.”
Events were to prove Truman more right than wrong on that account.
Eisenhower was the first and the last American President to contain Zionism (when he insisted in 1956/57 that Israel, after its collusion with Britain and France in war on Nasser’s Eygpt, should withdraw from occupied Arab territory without conditions).
There is a great deal of evidence to suggest that President Kennedy, if he had been allowed to live, was intending in a second term to continue Eisenhower’s containment of Zionism, and that as a result of doing so there would not have been a shift of U.S. policy in favor of Israel right or wrong. In that event, and in all probability, the 1967 war would not have happened – Greater Israel would not have been created; and the Zionist state would not have been allowed to develop nuclear weapons.
Though it contained no expletives, the most explicit statement of anger I am aware of was the one made by presidential candidate Kennedy after he had been taken to a meeting with Zionist funders in New York. After it, back in Washington, he went for a walk with an old and trusted friend, newspaper columnist Chares L. Bartlett. According to his account, Kennedy said:
As an American citizen I am outraged to have a Zionist group come to me and say – “We know your campaign is in trouble. We’re willing to pay your bills if you let us have control of your Middle East policy. They wanted control!”
In my view the question of who the bleep does Netanyahu think he is misses the point. It is that he knows who he is – another Israeli prime minister who, with the assistance of the Zionist lobby and its stooges in Congress, has got another American president by the testicles. At least for the time being.
Alan Hart
Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. Author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews: The False Messiah (Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews). He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor
*******************************************
See also:
President Obama’s opportunity to speak truth to power: Part 1
President Obama’s opportunity to speak truth to power – Rahm Emanuel does it for him – Part 11
Open Letter to President Obama: Change the Rules of the Game
Have Israeli Spies Infiltrated International Airports?
JONATHAN COOK
South Africa deported an Israeli airline official last week following allegations that Israel’s secret police, the Shin Bet, had infiltrated Johannesburg international airport in an effort to gather information on South African citizens, particularly black and Muslim travellers.
The move by the South African government followed an investigation by local TV showing an undercover reporter being illegally interrogated by an official with El Al, Israel’s national carrier, in a public area of Johannesburg’s OR Tambo airport.
The programme also featured testimony from Jonathan Garb, a former El Al guard, who claimed that the airline company had been a front for the Shin Bet in South Africa for many years.
Of the footage of the undercover reporter’s questioning, he commented: “Here is a secret service operating above the law in South Africa. We pull the wool over everyone’s eyes. We do exactly what we want. The local authorities do not know what we are doing.”
The Israeli foreign ministry is reported to have sent a team to South Africa to try to defuse the diplomatic crisis after the government in Johannesburg threatened to deport all of El Al’s security staff.
Mr Garb’s accusations have been supported by an investigation by the regulator for South Africa’s private security industries.
They have also been confirmed by human rights groups in Israel, which report that Israeli security staff are carrying out racial profiling at many airports around the world, apparently out of sight of local authorities.
Concern in South Africa about the activities of El Al staff has been growing since August, when South Africa’s leading investigative news show, Carte Blanche, went undercover to test Mr Garb’s allegations.
A hidden camera captured an El Al official in the departure hall claiming to be from “airport security” and demanding that the undercover reporter hand over his passport or ID as part of “airport regulations”. When the reporter protested that he was not flying but waiting for a friend, El Al’s security manager, identified as Golan Rice, arrived to interrogate him further. Mr Rice then warned him that he was in a restricted area and must leave.
Mr Garb commented on the show: “What we are trained is to look for the immediate threat – the Muslim guy. You can think he is a suicide bomber, he is collecting information. The crazy thing is that we are profiling people racially, ethnically and even on religious grounds … This is what we do.”
Mr Garb and two other fired workers have told the South African media that Shin Bet agents routinely detain Muslim and black passengers, a claim that has ignited controversy in a society still suffering with the legacy of decades of apartheid rule.
Suspect individuals, the former workers say, are held in an annex room, where they are interrogated, often on matters unrelated to airport security, and can be subjected to strip searches while their luggage is taken apart. Clandestine searches of their belongings and laptops are also carried out to identify useful documents and information.
All of this is done in violation of South African law, which authorises only the police, armed forces or personnel appointed by the transport minister to carry out searches.
The former staff also accuse El Al of smuggling weapons – licensed to the local Israeli embassy – into the airport for use by the secret agents.
Mr Garb went public after he was dismissed over a campaign he led for better pay and medical benefits for El Al staff.
A South African Jew, he said he was recruited 19 years ago by the Shin Bet. “We were trained at a secret camp [in Israel] where they train Israeli special forces and they train you how to use handguns, submachine guns and in unarmed combat.”
He added that he was assigned to “armed security” in the early 1990s. “Armed security is being undercover, carrying a weapon, a handgun and at that time as well, sounds crazy but we carried Samsonite briefcases with an Uzi submachine gun in it.”
Mr Garb claimed to have profiled 40,000 people for Israel over the past 20 years, including recently Virginia Tilley, a Middle East expert who is the chief researcher at South Africa’s Human Sciences Research Council. The think tank recently published a report accusing Israel of apartheid and colonialism in the Palestinian territories.
“The decision was she should be checked in the harshest way because of her connections,” Mr Garb said.
Ms Tilley confirmed that she had been detained at the airport by El Al staff and separated from her luggage. Mr Garb said that during this period an agent “photocopied all [her] documentation and then he forwarded it on to Israel” – Mr Garb believes for use by the Shin Bet.
Israeli officials have refused to comment on the allegations. A letter produced by Mr Garb – signed by Roz Bukris, El Al’s general manager in South Africa – suggests that he was employed by the Shin Bet rather than the airline. Ms Bukris, according to the programme, refused to confirm or deny the letter’s validity.
The Israeli Embassy in South Africa declined to discuss evidence that it, rather than El Al, had licensed guns issued to the airline’s security managers. Questioned last week by Ynet, Israel’s largest news website, about the deportation of the airline official, Yossi Levy, an Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, said he could not “comment on security matters”.
A report published in 2007 by two Israeli human rights organisations, the Nazareth-based Arab Association for Human Rights and the Centre Against Racism, found that Israeli airline staff used racial profiling at most major airports around the world, subjecting Arab and Muslim passengers to discriminatory and degrading treatment in violation both of international law and the host country’s laws.
“Our research showed that the checks conducted by El Al at foreign airports had all the hallmarks of Shin Bet interrogations,” said Mohammed Zeidan, the director of the Human Rights Association. “Usually the questions were less about the safety of the flight and more aimed at gathering information on the political activities or sympathies of the passengers.”
The human rights groups approached four international airports – in New York, Paris, Vienna and Geneva – where passengers said they had been subjected to discriminatory treatment, to ask under what authority the Israeli security services were operating. The first two airports refused to respond, while Vienna and Geneva said it was not possible to oversee El Al’s procedures.
“It is remarkable that these countries make no effort to supervise the actions of Israeli security personnel present on their territory, particularly in light of the discriminatory and humiliating procedures they apply,” the report states.
Source: CounterPunch
Photo: australiansforpalestine.com
Jonathan Cook
Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is www.jkcook.net.
A version of this article originally appeared in The National (www.thenational.ae), published in Abu Dhabi.
The US Congressman who sold his soul to the Israel lobby
U.S. Congressman Tom Perriello
How Tom Perriello became a slave of Israel
Adam Shapiro tells the story of a hitherto principled friend and campaigner for justice and human rights, Tom Perriello, who ran for Congress and, once elected, betrayed all of his principles and became a mere tool of the pro-apartheid American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, AIPAC.
”…the consistent lack of US credibility in the world spans Democrats and Republicans and is a consequence of our relationship with Israel and the exceptionalism applied to an occupier nation foisting apartheid on the Palestinians.”
One year ago, I watched election results coming in for Virginia’s Fifth Congressional District, where my friend and colleague Tom Perriello was challenging incumbent Virgil Goode, Jr. CNN kept flipping the winner because the vote was close. Finally, Tom emerged with a 727-vote victory. I was elated, because I knew Tom and knew his deeply rooted principles. And daring to accept that there might be something to this overall atmosphere of change and hope espoused by the president-elect, I felt encouraged by the seemingly new direction and new leaders the country was embracing.
Two years earlier, I met Tom in Afghanistan when he arrived as a consultant with the United Nations to explore transitional justice possibilities for the country. I was already working for a human rights organization, promoting rule of law, women’s rights and transitional justice. Tom had done similar work in Liberia helping launch a truth and reconciliation commission.
We quickly saw eye to eye on the work and became friends over discussions about the role of law in achieving justice in extremely difficult conflict and post-conflict circumstances. I took Tom hiking in the hills overlooking Kabul and we strategized on how to strengthen the justice sector in Afghanistan. Of course, my work on Palestine came up and Tom usually brought the discussion to the role of international law and the need for accountability on all sides – considerations that clearly help protect civilians, particularly Palestinians living under occupation.
A year later, back in the US, Tom invited me to join a group of dynamic young social entrepreneurs for a strategy/brainstorming meeting that led to the creation of Avaaz – a kind of MoveOn.org [[http://moveon.org/]] for the international community to organize for human rights, the environment and other progressive causes. One of the first campaigns launched by Avaaz was to call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza in January 2009 and for a robust international response to assure the lasting cessation of violence.
Shortly after that founding meeting of Avaaz, I received an email from Tom explaining that he was going to run for Congress in a long-shot attempt to unseat a conservative Republican. It was a surprise, but Tom was insistent he was going to retain his principles and values if he won. He was excited about the prospect of making real change if Obama became president. I shed my typical cynicism and encouraged friends to contribute to his campaign.
Fast forward one year, to the present, and I have been shocked and disappointed to learn that my friend Tom – a staunch supporter of international law, human rights and equality for all – has voted as a Congressman in favour of apartheid. On the face of it, House Resolution 867 “Calling on the president and the secretary of state to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration of the ‘Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ in multilateral fora” was a typical AIPAC -inspired (or even written) resolution to push the US Congress to support Israel when it got into hot water internationally. Already the White House and State Department have rejected the Goldstone Report, named after preeminent South African judge Richard Goldstone, a well-known Zionist and staunch supporter of Israel. Human rights organizations around the world support the report, and the credentials of the commission were outstanding. Judge Goldstone himself has repeatedly pointed out that the report also calls to task Hamas for violations of international law.
So why did Tom vote in favour of H.Res. 867 and how is this apartheid?
I believe Congressman Perriello’s vote resulted from the almost-obligatory fealty to AIPAC displayed by members of Congress – and perhaps his desire to get re-elected.
Incumbents have learned over the years not to cross AIPAC if re-election is important to them. This is not a tangential correlation – ask former Representative Cynthia McKinney, former Senator Charles Percy and former President George H.W. Bush what happened to them when they took stands helpful to securing Palestinian rights. So the logic behind his vote is pretty simple.
But is winning everything? Even when it means voting for apartheid? Where do accountability to self and the bedrock principles we discussed in the Kabul hills enter the equation?
If the Goldstone Report concerned any other country than Israel as the main perpetrator and any other people as victims than the Palestinians, there is no doubt that the report would be fully endorsed in Congress and perhaps there would be House Resolutions praising the work of the commission, supporting the role of the UN in investigating war crimes and affirming the need for the US government to take action to support implementing the findings. That this resolution was introduced against the report because the primary victims were Palestinian is an extension of Israel’s policies of discrimination that set Palestinians apart as a people with inferior rights. Voting in favour was akin to a stamp of approval that Palestinian lives are not equal: yes, they were killed, but so what, their deaths are not worth investigating. Such blatant disregard for a specific people’s humanity and human rights in favour of another people’s superior rights and privileged standing can only be understood as apartheid. Congressman Perriello and his colleagues have turned their backs on international law and human rights. They failed to offer a word of support for Palestinian freedom and the lives of the more than 300 Palestinian children killed by Israel in the winter war.
President Obama, unlike a well-trained and increasingly sycophantic Congress, has set out to change America’s image in the world. This image is not undermined because of our relationship with Ireland, Thailand or Chile – or even by North Korea, Iran, Pakistan or Afghanistan, despite the seeming inadequacy of US policy to meet these challenges. No, the consistent lack of US credibility in the world spans Democrats and Republicans and is a consequence of our relationship with Israel and the exceptionalism applied to an occupier nation foisting apartheid on the Palestinians. Most of the world grasps immediately the hypocrisy of the Congress when it votes against the carefully-documented work of Judge Goldstone, who has devoted his life to fighting racism and apartheid.
When my friend Tom told me he was trying to become a Congressman, he assured me that he would maintain who he was. The man I knew was someone who fought for justice, who worked tirelessly to promote international law and human rights, and who was aware of the reality of Congress but determined to be different. Congressman Perriello, I am afraid, has become like so many of his colleagues, a mere tool of a hard-right AIPAC agenda that has no business dictating American policy. He has become part of an American dog wagged by an Israeli and AIPAC tail.
Voters are again disengaging because they continue to see too much business as usual. Tom is just the latest manifestation of a politician abandoning core beliefs.
What is most disappointing, perhaps, is not that my friend Tom is missing in this incarnation of Congressman Perriello – who seems willing to trade fundamental human rights for political expedience – but that in the end I was right to be cynical.
Source: www.redress.cc
Adam Shapiro is an award-winning documentary filmmaker and human rights activist, currently working with the Free Gaza Movement.
Zionism’s un-Christian Bible
Maidhc Ó Cathail
November 22, 2009
“For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgement.”
- The New Scofield Study Bible
The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (http://www.BDSmovement.net) campaign should widen its scope to target non-Israeli companies who contribute significantly to the oppression of Palestinians. As part of this broader strategy, priority should be given to one of the most egregious offenders, the prestigious British publisher, Oxford University Press. As unlikely as it may seem, the world’s largest university press is responsible for one of the greatest obstacles to justice for Palestinians – The Scofield Bible.
Since it was first published in 1909, the Scofield Reference Bible has made uncompromising Zionists out of tens of millions of Americans. When John Hagee, the founder of Christians United for Israel, said that “50 million evangelical bible-believing Christians unite with five million American Jews standing together on behalf of Israel,” it was the Scofield Bible that he was talking about.
Although the Scofield Reference Bible contains the text of the King James Authorized Version, it is not the traditional Protestant bible but Cyrus I. Scofield’s annotated commentary that is the problem. More than any other factor, it is Scofield’s notes that induced generations of American evangelicals to believe that God demands their uncritical support for the modern State of Israel.
Blessing Israel
Central to Christian Zionist belief is Scofield’s commentary on Genesis 12:3. For the sake of clarity, Scofield’s notes have been italicized in the following passage:
“‘I will bless them that bless thee.’ In fulfillment closely related to the next clause, ‘And curse him that curseth thee.’ Wonderfully fulfilled in the history of the dispersion. It has invariably fared ill with the people who have persecuted the Jew – well with those who have protected him. The future will still more remarkably prove this principle.”
Drawing on Scofield’s speculative interpretation, John Hagee claims, “The man or nation that lifts a voice or hand against Israel invites the wrath of God.”
However, as Stephen Sizer points out, in his definitive critique, Christian Zionism: Road-map to Armageddon? “The promise, when referring to Abraham’s descendants speaks of God blessing them, not of entire nations ‘blessing’ the Hebrew nation, still less the contemporary and secular State of Israel.”
Apparently unaware of this more orthodox reading, The New Scofield Study Bible, published by Oxford University Press in 1984, enhanced Scofield’s interpretation, by adding, “For a nation to commit the sin of anti-Semitism brings inevitable judgment.” Reading such tendentious comments, a bible-believing Christian could easily assume, for example, that God will punish the 114 countries which endorsed the Goldstone Report.
“Sustained by a dubious exegesis of selective biblical texts,” Stephen Sizer concludes, “Christian Zionism’s particular reading of history and contemporary events … sets Israel and the Jewish people apart from other peoples in the Middle East….it justifies the endemic racism intrinsic to Zionism, exacerbates tensions between Jews and Palestinians and undermines attempts to find a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, all because ‘the Bible tells them so.’”
The incredible Scofield
In his 2008 book, The Rise of Israel: A History of a Revolutionary State, Jonathan R. Adelman describes the crucial support Israel receives from Christian fundamentalists as “totally fortuitous.” The incredible career of the man who wrote “the Bible of Fundamentalism,” however, casts considerable doubt on that assertion.
Two years after Scofield’s reported conversion to Christianity in 1879, the Atchison Patriot was less than impressed. Describing the former Atchison resident as the “late lawyer, politician and shyster generally,” the article went on to recount a few of Scofield’s “many malicious acts.” These included a series of forgeries in St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to six months in jail.
Being a “born again” preacher, however, did not preclude Scofield from becoming a member of an exclusive New York men’s club in 1901. In his devastating biography, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Joseph M. Canfield comments, “The admission of Scofield to the Lotos Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion that has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C. I. Scofield.”
That someone, Canfield suspects, was associated with one of the club’s committee members, the Wall Street lawyer Samuel Untermeyer. As Canfield intimates, Scofield’s theology was “most helpful in getting Fundamentalist Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer’s pet projects – the Zionist Movement.”
Others, however, have been more explicit about the nature of Scofield’s service to the Zionist agenda. In “Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem,” Prof. David W. Lutz claims, “Untermeyer used Scofield, a Kansas city lawyer with no formal training in theology, to inject Zionist ideas into American Protestantism. Untermeyer and other wealthy and influential Zionists whom he introduced to Scofield promoted and funded the latter’s career, including travel in Europe.”
Absent such powerful connections, it is hard to imagine “this peer among scalawags” ever getting a contract with Oxford University Press to publish his bible. Nevertheless, it remains a mystery why OUP chose to endorse such a sectarian work.
Atonement
If there had been no Scofield Bible, American presidents influenced by Christian Zionism, such as Truman, Johnson, Reagan and George W. Bush, would most likely have been less sympathetic to Israeli demands, and consequently more attentive to U.S. interests. Moreover, the American people might have been spared the well-publicized pro-Israeli rants of John Hagee, Pat Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell, not to mention the lucrative End Times “prophecy” peddled by Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye.
But it is the people of the Middle East who have suffered most at the hands of an expansionist Israel, emboldened by the unswerving allegiance of America’s Christian Zionists, who were led to believe that Scofield’s words were God’s will.
Although much needless suffering has already been caused by the Scofield Bible, perhaps it’s not too late for Oxford University Press to publicly disavow its harmful book. Among its many victims are 3.5 million Palestinian refugees whose right to return is fervently opposed by Christian Zionists, who believe that the land belongs exclusively to “God’s chosen people.” At the very least, OUP could demonstrate remorse for its role in promoting ethnic cleansing by compensating those refugees with the considerable profits accrued over the past century from sales of its Zionist bible.
Maidhc Ó Cathail
Maidhc Ó Cathail is a freelance writer living in Japan. He has written for Antiwar.com, Dissident Voice, The Palestine Chronicle, OpEd News, Media Monitors Network and many other publications.
More Maidhc Ó Cathail
Encouraging Rhetoric
Samia Nasir Khoury
Peres - Barack initiative
November 19, 2009
A few days ago the papers and the internet were filled with a variety of voices in reaction to the Israeli decision to build 900 housing units in the Gilo settlement. Gilo was established on land that belonged to the town of Beit Jala in the Bethlehem area, and was illegally confiscated and annexed to Jerusalem.
Despite the fact that Mr. Obama had demanded last month that Israel stop all settlement activity, the Israeli Prime Minister did not heed his request and unfortunately Mr. Obama bowed. When a spoilt child can get away with anything for more than four decades, this should not come as a surprise to its godparents. However the President commented yesterday that additional settlement building does not contribute to Israel’s security. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and the State Department spokesman, Ian Kelly voiced their criticism of the decision, and so did the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner during his recent visit to Israel. Sweden, which holds the presidency of the European Union not only criticized the decision but also considered the eviction and demolishing of homes as illegal according to international law. Of course it was not a surprise to hear the World Council of Churches condemning the decision as it has always been vocal where injustice prevails.
It was refreshing to hear the voice of the UN general secretary also on this issue deploring the Israeli move. You have the mandate and the tools Mr. Ban Ki Moon, so why is it taking you so long to use those tools to bring about a just and peaceful end to this conflict.
Thanks to all those voices regretting, reprimanding, deploring and being dismayed by these actions. Hearing all this encouraging rhetoric one would think that this was Israel’s first violation after 42 years of military occupation. The peace process which had given hope to the people of the region continued to be a mirage and a process of futile negotiations for 18 years, during which Israel was creating new realities on the ground. Even the architect of the Oslo agreement, Mr. Abbas and the chief negotiator, Saeb Uraikat themselves have given up on these negotiations. Ironically a large sector of the Palestinian population realized the futility of the process sooner than the negotiators, but despite their opposition the negotiators proceeded with the negotiations and kept their commitments to the various agreements to find out at last that it was all in vain.
“Peres-Barak” initiative?
After living under Israeli occupation for 42 years we realize by now how Israel always manages to side track issues when it is under pressure. So it comes up with this new “Peres-Barack” initiative which is even humiliating to consider. I hope Mr. Barack does not think he is proposing another “generous offer”. It could very well be as a reaction to the Palestinian plan to seek recognition of a Palestinian State on the 1967 borders. Rightly so, it is high time the United Nations attended to that matter rather than pay attention to this arrogant initiative of “ temporary borders with an equal size of the West Bank occupied in 1967.” The Palestinians might be desperate and helpless, but they are no fools although they were certainly taken for a long ride with these negotiations.
Actually one cannot help but wonder whether Israel is genuinely interested in peace. Maybe it is the mélange of the Israeli population that makes it impossible to make peace with their neighbors, as they might always need a common enemy to hold the nation together. All under the myth of “security”
Enough is enough, and what needs to be said or written has been said and written. Sometimes I even feel I am repeating myself, and not offering my readers anything new. However I felt that with all this rhetoric so clearly expressed, it was time to challenge those voices to translate that rhetoric into action. Not one time since 1967did the word sanctions come up regarding Israel. Not one time did the USA administration say that it will stop aid to Israel, or even make it conditional. On the contrary every time Israel acts with impunity it seems to be rewarded as if there is a separate set of laws that applies to Israel alone, while the whole world are subject to another set of laws. The Goldstone affair is a glaring example of how the international community runs matters. Once again today we heard that the possibility of sanctions against Iran is there, despite the fact that Iran is showing all cooperation.
Dare we hope for the sake of justice, peace and security for the whole region that the USA administration and the European community with its newly elected president will support the United Nations in rising up to its responsibility to bring about a just solution to this conflict. A solution that is long over due, even if it had to consider sanctions against Israel unless it conforms with international law and abides by UN resolutions.
“Lawlessness must have painful consequences for the lawless, not their victims” Stuart Littlewood
_______________________________________________________________________________
Samia Khoury
Samia Nasir Khoury was born in Jaffa, Palestine on November 24, 1933. She graduated from Birzeit College in 1950, and was awarded a BBA degree from Southwestern University in Georgetown, Texas, in 1954. Samia then returned to Birzeit, and worked from 1954-1960 at her former school as executive secretary, registrar and director of women students’ activities. Samia retired in 2003 after serving for 17 years as president of Rawdat El-Zuhur, a coeducational elementary school for the lower income community in East Jerusalem. She continues to serve as treasurer of the board of the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in East Jerusalem and on the board of trustees of Birzeit University in Birzeit, Palestine.
ARE HATE CRIME LAWS LEGALIZING TREASON?
Jeff Gates
The Anti-Defamation League silencing strategy offers a microcosm of how the US was induced to war in Iraq based on false intelligence, says Jeff Gates.
Lawful Treason?
Winning wars in the Information Age largely depends on winning the battle for public opinion. Thus the opinion-shaping role of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) when it attacked a high profile California professor for his criticism of Israeli policy in Palestine.
That ADL intimidation campaign successfully chilled debate on campuses nationwide during several time-critical months while a new president, promising the hope of change, reassessed U.S.-Israeli relations. His only change—endorsing more Israeli settlements on Palestinian land—quashed any hope of peace.
This ADL silencing strategy offers a microcosm of how the U.S. was induced to war in Iraq based on false intelligence. From the provocation of September 11, 2001 until the invasion of March 2003, war-planners ignored, dismissed or sought to silence anyone critical of the spurious premises offered for war.
Only later did we discover that the intelligence was fixed around a preset agenda. Even now, Americans are unaware that the U.S.-led invasion had long been an Israeli goal.
In similar fashion, an ADL campaign silenced on-campus criticism of Israel’s December 2008 assault on Gaza. At the University of California Santa Barbara, ADL-initiated charges were lodged against sociology Professor William Robinson. The disciplinary action dragged on until June 24th when 100 professors and 20 department heads demanded an end to all proceedings.
By then the damage was done-to the reputation of Professor Robinson, to academic freedom at the University of California and to national security as this campaign silenced academics countrywide. While Robinson’s reputation can be restored, the damage to national security is irreparable.
Manipulating Thought
The ADL and the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles coordinated the assault on Robinson after he shared with students from his globalization website a photo essay critical of Israel. The essay had circulated for weeks on the Internet.
Aaron Ettenberg, a member of the Faculty Senate Charges Committee, collaborated with Santa Barbara Rabbi Arthur Gross-Schaefer who reviled Robinson in the local community and urged-along with the ADL-that he be disciplined by the university for his “anti-Semitic” behavior.
Chancellor Henry Yang was subjected to threats to withhold funding featuring a campaign led by ADL National Director Abe Foxman and Rabbi Marvin Heir from the Wiesenthal Center.
Professor Ettenberg had served the previous two years as president of the local chapter of B’nai B’rith, an ADL affiliate. Rabbi Gross-Schaefer was director of the local chapter of Hillel, an on-campus ADL affiliate.
Mark Yudof, president of the University of California, opted not to intervene even as this silencing campaign attracted international attention. Yudof’s wife, Judith, is the immediate past international president of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism representing 760 synagogues. She is also a director of Hillel.
As with the dominance of Jewish Zionists among neoconservative war-planners, the pro-Israeli bias was all-pervasive. Richard Blum chairs the statewide Board of Regents for the University of California. His wife, U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. What was their reaction as this professor was silenced? Silence.
Coincidence or Faith-Based Coordination?
Would a professor and a local rabbi have risked their careers and their reputations absent their confidence that-based on the shared bias of university administrators and government officials-they could intimidate with impunity? Absent such implied support, would this silencing operation have dragged on for so long?
Absent their silence-with its tacit approval-what might have been the impact of campus criticism when Israel’s assault on the captive population of Gaza left 1300 dead, one-third reportedly women and children? Those complicit in this silencing campaign knew the impact on public opinion of student protests against the Vietnam War-particularly on California campuses.
Those concerned about anti-Semitism must explain how this broadly coordinated intimidation campaign was allowed to succeed. In the same way that public opinion was manipulated prior to an invasion that launched the Global War on Terrorism, this campaign sought to deny students the facts required to understand Israel’s role in provoking that terror.
Absent access to facts, how can the U.S. preserve a system of self-governance founded on the premise of informed consent? Without facts, how can national security be protected from those who “fix” intelligence in order to deploy the U.S. military for the interests of a foreign nation?
Unless those complicit are held accountable, how will American youth learn the essential role of free and open debate on topics of direct relevance to their lives?
In a representative system of government, the greatest threat to liberty is manipulation of the facts required for informed citizen participation. Anyone who cherishes freedom should be alarmed at the ongoing success of such manipulation and outraged that its common source traces to a purported ally.
Psychological warfare targets knowledge as a means to manipulate thought, opinion and emotion (the “hearts and minds”) and thereby influence behavior. At the center of such disinformation is the displacement of facts with false beliefs meant to prod decision-making toward a preset goal.
Thus the false reports of Iraqi WMD, Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda, Iraqi mobile biological weapons laboratories and so forth. Thus the high profile assault on a high-profile center of learning to silence a professor who threatened to replace manipulated beliefs with confirmed facts.
Where U.S. policies toward Israel are at stake, facts are routinely suppressed to shape debate. Such strategic deceit systematically undermines U.S. national security.
Treason in Plain Sight
Intimidation campaigns have long been a key tool for organized crime and for those whose undisclosed agenda can succeed only when shielded from public scrutiny. Those complicit in such “psy-ops” know their agenda could not prevail in an open debate. They also know that if their treachery is detected they face charges of treason, a capital crime.
That’s why this form of treason instead targets knowledge to corrupt the facts required for informed choice. That focus denies those targeted a meaningful choice while leaving intact the appearance of open debate. Meanwhile the perpetrators seek refuge behind the very freedoms they undermine-freedom of speech, press, assembly and religion.
In this case, pro-Israeli operatives silenced on-campus criticism of Israel while Israel committed dozens of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Evidence of those crimes was depicted in the Internet-posted photo essay that the ADL attacked as “anti-Semitic.”
What was the strategic result? That assault on Gaza marked yet another violent provocation guaranteed to catalyze a violent reaction (aka “terrorism”), adding plausibility to the narrative of “militant Islam.” The result made the U.S. appear guilty by its association with this criminality.
We then compounded our complicity by covering up the facts when the Congress, dominated by the Israel lobby, overwhelmingly approved a resolution portraying as “irredeemably biased” a chronicle of those war crimes in “The Goldstone Report,” a comprehensive account by an eminent Jewish jurist. [See How the Israel Lobby Took Control of U.S. Foreign Policy http://criminalstate.com]
The U.S. was doubly damaged. We not only discredited ourselves, we also endangered our national security by condoning criminality destined to provoke more violence directed at our troops.
When such psy-ops campaigns are detected, defenders of democracy must fight back by making the perpetrators transparent and their common motivation apparent. This is how Israel wages war on the U.S. from inside the U.S.-by deceiving us to wage its wars and by provoking others to hate us due to our alliance with religious extremists and their apartheid policies.
Duplicity has long been a weapon deployed to “wage war by way of deception.” That’s the operative motto of the Mossad, the intelligence and foreign operations branch of the Jewish nationalists who have dominated Israeli politics since a Christian-Zionist president erred in 1948 by recognizing as a legitimate “state” this enclave of Jewish extremists and ultra-nationalists.
Israel specializes in what the Pentagon calls unconventional warfare. Such warfare is only “unconventional” for the targeted population (us). For militant Zionists, this is how war is waged. When your numbers are few and your ambitions vast, deceit becomes an essential force-multiplier.
In the Information Age, why would anyone expect war to be waged in any way other than by deception? Where else but in plain sight could such warfare be waged?
For freedom to prevail against such psy-ops requires a shift in strategic focus. A robust defense would make this manipulation transparent in real time before deception can work its intended impact on public opinion.
The dominance of pro-Israelis in mainstream media complicates that task. Media complicity was essential to succeed in the deceit that took the U.S. to war and that now seeks to obscure Israeli war crimes.
A Special Relationship with Fanatics
The Pentagon warned six decades ago that Jewish extremists sought military and economic dominance over the entire Middle East. As the Joint Chiefs of Staff cautioned Harry Truman:
“All stages of this program are equally sacred to the fanatical concepts of the Jewish leaders. The program is openly admitted by some leaders, and has been privately admitted to United States officials by responsible leaders of the presently dominant Jewish group-The Jewish Agency.”
Other than religious fanatics, who would deny Americans-including college students-the facts required to make informed choices on an issue as critical as taking the U.S. to war in the Middle East? Other than pro-Israeli publishers and broadcast media owners, who would have the motivation to report as “facts” the phony intelligence that was fixed around Israeli goals?
If not Israel and its Zionist advocates-both Christians and Jews-who would have the means, motive, opportunity and, importantly, the stable nation state intelligence required to corrupt the intelligence that took the U.S. to war? Or to silence academic critics just when those who induced the invasion of Iraq intensified their efforts to expand this war to Iran and now Pakistan?
If the behavior described is not treason, what is? If this is treason, why have those complicit not been charged? Is Professor Ettenberg still employed by the university? If so, why? Have rabbis Gross-Schaefer and Heir been dismissed from their positions of influence? If not, why not?
Why hasn’t the ADL’s Abe Foxman been indicted? Did he confer with the Yudoffs during this silencing campaign? Has a federal grand jury been impaneled to consider charges of treason? Foxman was invited to the White House for the October 28th signing of the ADL’s “model hate crimes” bill. Will that federal legislation now be deployed to lawfully intimidate critics?
Have mainstream publishers and media owners been investigated for their complicity in this national scale fraud on public opinion? If not, why not? Is the Federal Communications Commission moving to revoke the broadcast licenses of those who used the public airwaves to deceive the public? If not, why not?
Are news reports correct that an investment firm run by Richard Blum made more than $100 million on the rising value of its stock in a top defense contractor? Did his firm also invest in media outlets that sold us this war?
In an irony of epic proportions, ADL’s amendment to federal hate crimes law was tacked onto an appropriations bill for the Department of Defense. Will the ADL now seek to portray as “anti-Semitic” those who document for a long-deceived military the common source of the psy-ops that took U.S. forces to war in the Middle East?
Will those who repeat the Joint Chiefs’ warning about religious fanatics be targeted for federal prosecution? Will allegations of hate be deployed to silence debate? Is treason now lawful?
Jeff gates
Jeff Gates : Author, educator, attorney, merchant banker and adviser to policy-makers worldwide and U.S. Veteran. Jeff was counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance (1980-87) working for Democrat Russell Long, son of Louisiana Governor and U.S. Senator Huey P. Long. Specialist in employee benefits law—pensions, 401(k) plans, stock options, employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs), et.al. Tax-qualified employee benefit plans accounted for $17 trillion in assets (April 2007) and more than half the funds in the hands of institutional investors. As of 2007, ESOPs were in place in 11,500 firms nationwide, covering 10% of the U.S. workforce and holding $800 billion in assets.
Law practice w/ former Senators Russell Long, Democrat of Louisiana and Paul Laxalt, Republican of Nevada, chairman of Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaigns.
Counsel to Kelso & Company, Manhattan-based merchant bankers, completing $4 billion in transactions in 24-months, including the $3 billion leveraged buyout of American Standard, Inc., with employees and managers gaining a 33% stake in this multinational firm.
Author, Democracy at Risk – Rescuing Main Street from Wall Street (April 2000). Written as a sequel to The Ownership Solution –Toward a Shared Capitalism for the 21st Century (1998). Both books cited by presidential candidate Ralph Nader when branding U.S. Greens “the party of the new populism.” Guilt By Association – How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War (2008).
Draftsman, 1986 Presidential Task Force Report on Project Economic Justice: “U.S. Efforts to Encourage Employee Stock Ownership Plans in Central America and the Caribbean.” Author, World Bank Discussion Paper: Employee Stock Ownership Plans: Objectives, Design Options, International Experience; DEMOS Argument Series (U.K.): Revolutionizing Share Ownership – The Stakeowner Economy; Tomorrow’s Capitalism (Pacific Institute), et. al.
Advisory work with 35-plus governments, including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Guyana, Haiti, Hungary, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Morocco, Pakistan, Peru, Poland, Puerto Rico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, Trinidad, Tunisia, Zambia, Zimbabwe and the U.K. South Korean President Kim Dae-Jung announced August 2000 that the Korean edition of The Ownership Solution was his vacation-reading pick.
Contributor to trade, professional and popular publications worldwide: Financial Times, Japan Times, Financial Executive, M&A Today, Boston Review, Latin Finance, East/West Business Report, Society, Human Resource Management, Los Angeles Times, National Journal, World Times, The Humanist, Peace Review, Business Ethics, America, Tikkun, Whole Earth, Perspectives, Journal of Society of Organizational Learning, Journal of Organizational Change Management, et.al..
He is also the author of the new book Guilt by Association: How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War. His previous books include Democracy at Risk: Rescuing Main Street From Wall Street and The Ownership Solution: Toward a Shared Capitalism for the 21st Century.
He resides in Tempe Arizona. jeffgates2@gmail.com. Visit his web site, www.criminalstate.com
Read Also:
How the Israel Lobby Took Control of U.S. Foreign Policy - By: Jeff Gates
AIPAC Sends in the Clowns! - By Franklin Lamb
How Zionist Lobby Stooges in Congress Brought Shame to their Institution - By: Alan Hart
Prof. William Robinson speaks out in defense of Academic Freedom after being attacked and intimidated by Anti-Defamation League (ADL).
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
ZIONIST CONTROL OF BRITAIN’S GOVERNMENT: 1940-2009
William A. Cook
November 20, 2009
“After so many years of setting the tone, bribing UK politicians and controlling the BBC they (Zionists) are used to being untouchable.” (Gilad Atzmon, “Britain Must de-Zionist Itself Immediately,” Nov. 17, 2009, MWC News).
This week the British people listened to the Daily Mall’s Peter Oborne present, on Channel 4, his devastating account of the Jewish lobby’s control of their government. Now we know that virtually all the principal politicians in the UK of both parties, like their brothers across the lake in our House and Senate, take “contributions” from the Israeli lobby machine ensuring that the Anglo-American mid-east policies follow the dictates of the Israeli government. Gilad Atzmon responded to this report in his article “Britain must de-Zionize itself immediately,” noting that this control has been in place for so many years the lobby feels “untouchable.”
How many years are “many” one might ask? In 1941, the High Commissioner of Palestine, Harold MacMichael, Senior Palestine Mandate officer for the British Mandate forces in Palestine, sent the following “Top Secret” “Memorandum on the Participation of the Jewish National Institutions in Palestine in Acts of Lawlessness and Violence” to the Secretary of State, dated October 16th, a report prepared by The Palestine Police, Criminal Investigation Department:
The memorandum illustrates—indeed, brings into full limelight—the fact that the Mandatory is faced potentially with as grave a danger in Palestine from Jewish violence as it ever faced from Arab violence, a danger infinitely less easy to meet by the methods of repression which have been employed against Arabs. In the first place, the Jews … have the moral and political support … of considerable sections of public opinion both in the United Kingdom and the United States of America … all the influence and political ability of the Zionists would be brought to bear to show that the Jews in Palestine were the victims of aggression, and that a substantial body of opinion abroad would be persuaded of the truth of the contention.
Quite obviously, MacMichael understands that the Mandatory has little power at home over the zealous actions of the Zionists as they manipulate public and political opinion even as they expand their terrorism against the British Mandate government in Palestine. This is an untenable position to be in, responsible for government control and security of those under its authority, i.e. Palestinians as well as Jews, and knowing that the Jews are set on driving the British out of Palestine, and knowing that the home government can offer little help.
The Zionists and their “gangs,” a euphemism for well equipped and well trained military forces, launched a full scale terrorist rebellion against the British by robbing banks, indiscriminate killing of British police, and the assassination of British minister-resident Lord Moyne in 1944. By the end of World War II things got even worse: “The Haganah carried out anti-British military operations—liberation of interned immigrants from the Atlit camp; the bombing of the country’s railroad network; sabotage raids on radar installations and bases of the British police mobile force; sabotage of British vessels … and the destruction of all road and railroad bridges on the borders.” All of this terrorism was conducted against the Mandate Government while the home government remained silent under the pall of Israeli Zionist propaganda (Meir Pa’il, “From Hashomer to the Israel Defense Forces: Armed Jewish Defense in Palestine,” World War II). www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/source/History/resist.htm.
But recording the acts of terrorism does not do justice to the conditions the Mandate government faced. MacMichael describes the reality of the forces aligned against the police in Palestine.
A second matter which deeply impressed me is the almost Nazi control exercised by the official Jewish organizations over the Jewish community, willy nilly, through the administration of funds from abroad, the issue of labor certificates in connection with the immigration quota, the forced contributions to funds and the power of the Histadruth. … The community is under the closed oligarchy of the Jewish official organizations which control Zionist policy and circumscribe the lives of the Jewish community in all directions…
Perhaps one of the most frightening observations MacMichael makes comes at the very end of his dispatch: “As matters now stand it seems to me inevitable that the Zionist Juggernaut which has been created with such intensity of zeal for a Jewish national state will be the cause of very serious trouble in the Near East.” Prophetic words indeed.
The memorandum provided by the Palestine Police Department includes approximately 50 0 pages of seized documents from the Jewish Agency and related organizations. These documents reveal the intention of the Zionists that controlled operations in Palestine as they worked to force into existence a Jewish State. “We regard it as our duty to caution you against any attempt to decide on an anti-Zionist solution … We regard it as a duty to utter another warning. Do not postpone the political solution for ten years … The Jews are a nation. The land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel. The Jewish State will be established. It is better that it should be established with your help and for your benefit, than against you” (The Jewish Resistance Movement, March 25th, 1946, Rhodes House Archives).
The Mandate Criminal Investigation Department was headed by Richard Catling. Catling’s memorandum begins with an understanding of the “intricate Jewish political, social and economic structure in Palestine.” A series of appendices chart these structures marking in passing that “… the Palestine Royal Commission Report of 1937 understood ‘The Agency (Jewish) is obviously not a governing body; it can only advise and cooperate in a certain wide field.’ But allied as it is with the Vaad Leumi, and commanding the allegiance of the great majority of the Jews in Palestine, it unquestionably exercises, both in Jerusalem and in London, a considerable influence on the conduct of government.” Catling’s frustration with the actual control of the Jews over British policy in Palestine glares through this document: “This powerful and efficient organization amounts in fact, to a government existing side by side with the Mandatory Government…”
The Zionist controlled Jewish Agency actively undermined the legal authority in Palestine even as it operated to undermine support for that government in Britain, placing UK forces in harms way as they attempted to fulfill their authorized responsibilities in Palestine. It also demonstrates the determination of the Agency’s leadership in undermining the very nation that gave it a means of establishing a “homeland” in Palestine through the Balfour Declaration. The wording of that declaration is rarely presented in its full form: “His Majesty’s government view with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.” The declaration did not intend to establish a Jewish State. Indeed, the wording, “national home,” was used intentionally instead of “state.” Additionally, the first draft referred to the principle ‘that Palestine should be’ reconstituted ‘as the national home of the Jewish people.’ In the final text, the word ‘that’ was replaced with ‘in’ to avoid committing all of Palestine to the Jews only.
Now perhaps we can answer the question, “How many years has the British government been under the control of the Zionist influence?” Three score and ten, the biblical age. Perhaps it’s time that Britain is reborn, free from the shackles that bind it to this corrupt power that flouts international law, wantonly commits crimes against humanity, and in brazen arrogance tells the Nations United to shove its demands to comply with the civilized communities of the world.
(Note: Sir Richard C. Catling’s files have been released to this writer by the chief Archivist of the Rhodes House Library of the Bodleian Libraries at Oxford University. Some of the material presented above comes from the “Introduction” of a yet to be published book due out this coming spring.)
William A. Cook is a Professor of English at the University of La Verne in southern California and serves as editor and writer for multiple Internet publications. His published books include Tracking Deception: Bush Mid-East Policy, Hope Destroyed, Justice Denied: The Rape of Palestine, and The Chronicles of Nefaria, a novella. www.drwilliamacook.com.
U.S. Should Stand Against Apartheid in Israel
Sam Jadallah
Illustration: Carlos Latuff
November 3 marked, in the words of political blogger Philip Weiss, a “historically dark day” in the U.S. Congress. House Republicans and Democrats lined up to vote against the United Nations Fact-Finding Mission carried out by Justice Richard Goldstone and to bash Goldstone, a committed Zionist, because he had the temerity to detail Israel’s war crimes in Gaza this past winter. Expressing not a word of concern regarding the over 300 Palestinian children killed in Israel’s attacks, the disappointing resolution places our Congress on the front lines of denying documented war crimes.
Congressional rhetoric continues to place blame on Palestinians, insisting to a large extent that they are responsible for their own misery. But it is absurd to think that Palestinians will simply surrender to life under permanent discrimination and iron-fisted military rule.
Freedom and equality must be centerpieces of American efforts to secure peace in the region. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejects this with misleading words and ongoing colonization of Palestinian territory. He offers caveats, limitations and conditions to ensure Palestinians will not realize fundamental aspirations and dreams.
His newest condition demands that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state, despite 20 percent of Israel’s population being Palestinian. This demand is akin to George Wallace insisting Martin Luther King Jr. recognize the U.S. as a white state. Yet, American leaders, who would never support the United States as a white state, uphold this in Israel despite such language implicitly relegating Palestinian citizens to inferior status.
Already, over 20 Israeli laws favor Jewish citizens and discriminate against Palestinians. And in the Israeli-controlled West Bank, Palestinians face segregated roads, unequal distribution of water and a dual system of law.
The question is how to break the impasse. I look to guidance Nelson Mandela offered from his prison cell. He asked, “What freedom am I being offered when I must ask permission to live in an urban area? What freedom am I being offered when I need a stamp in my pass to seek work?”
I have profound doubts as to Netanyahu’s intentions when days ago a university student in Bethlehem was transferred back to Gaza because she was in the occupied West Bank “illegally.” Israel’s pass stamps for this young woman, Berlanty Azzam, are just as noxious as in apartheid South Africa.
Palestinian lives are increasingly shaped by stunting discrimination and despair. The time is long past for “economic progress,” “easing
A view of Israel's separation wall that separates occupied East Jerusalem from the occupied West Bank. (Magnus Johansson, Maan Images)
travel restrictions” and other baby steps for Palestinians that avoid a just and legally based solution. Only a focus on the prize — freedom and equality, neither of which can be concessions — will prevent the situation from dramatically worsening, and rapidly.
Americans who fought Jim Crow or apartheid must reject today’s version in the occupied Palestinian territories. America’s leadership is based on promoting freedom and equality around the world, and we must start with our allies.
South Africa achieved freedom only when President F.W. de Klerk released Mandela and legalized his “terrorist” ANC organization under external boycotts and political pressure. Clearly, Israel’s leaders are incapable of providing freedom and equality without a clear and strong message from the U.S. And the longer we support military rule and discrimination, the more we erode our leadership.
It’s time for our leadership to step up for our values and call on Israeli leaders to follow the South African path to peace. Any solution starts with a clear and immediate commitment to delivering freedom and equality.
American and Israeli leaders need to replace rhetoric with tangible freedom and equality for all people in a land so overdue these blessings.
Freedom can’t wait.
SOURCE: Mercurynews.com
Sam Jadallah
SAM JADALLAH is a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, former Microsoft executive and co-founder and chairman of the board of the Institute for Middle East Understanding. He wrote this article for the Mercury News.
__._,_.___
The Sun Tzu of Palestinian Resistance
Donald Corder
A method in mighty military madness
November 19, 2009
Israeli PM was photographed touring a German-made submarine that can launch missiles carrying nuclear warheads as Netanyahu simultaneously threatens war with Iran
‘Political will to comment horror was in effect its own brand of genius during the time of war,’ paraphrasing Marlon Brando in his 1979 ‘Apocalypse Now’ role as Green Beret Colonel, Walter Kurtz, whose army has crossed the border into Cambodia and is conducting hit-and-run missions against the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army (NVA). Justice Richard Goldstone’s Report ‘Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ documents and declares to the world Israel does indeed have the political will to relentlessly follow Colonel Kurtz’s logic in their pursuit of an agenda reaching back to the Israeli land grabs in the Ottoman ruled Palestine in the 1880’s. While the exceptionally high level of political consciousness of the Jewish Yishuv united around acquiring the entirety of Palestine as their single national purpose by the end of 1947. The Zionist social institutions and infrastructure were converted into a shadow government that intermingled with powerful world leaders and garnered global financing from the Jewish Diaspora. See pages 16 – 17 “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem” by Benny Morris.
Crimes against humanity were thereafter employed by Israel’s mass expulsion of Palestinian refugees and subsequent convening of the Lausanne Conference in Switzerland to pressure Israel to stop its ethnic cleansing and accept UN Resolutions 181 (Partition of Palestine) and 194 (right of return of Palestinian refugees) although the resolutions were refused by Israel and never formally endorsed by the UN Security Council. The Israeli Declaration of Independence was unilaterally announced on 14 May 1948 (5 Iyar, 5708). Zionist ideology was thereafter hastened in the wake of the probable outcome of the 1967 Six Day War; when the United States provided nuclear capability supplied to Israel was scheduled for a doomsday deployment scenario by the Nation of Israel against the planet.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro heads the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the Yitzhar Jewish settlement according to his book “The King’s Torah”, even babies and children can be killed if they pose a threat to Israel. While in what was deemed a ‘method in mighty military madness’ Israeli PM was photographed touring a German-made submarine that can launch missiles carrying nuclear warheads as Netanyahu simultaneously threatens war with Iran and is suspected in the destabilization of Pakistan. Support of the madness is reflected throughout the social and political fabric rampant against the Nation of Palestine when seventy-three percent (73%) of Israeli conscripts volunteer to serve in Israeli combat units, giving rise to a 10-year-high in personnel, reports Yediot Aharonot. Inasmuch as there is no public “beef” with the Taiwanese government and Israel we can quietly speculate the annual $2.7 billion US dollars directed into the Israeli coffers is designed for the efficient and systematic murder of Arabs and Muslims living in the region and protection of the global oil interests.
Next area of global confrontation for the Nation of Palestine will be the International Criminal Court, which even now is being politically mapped by the United States http://www.khaleejtimes.com/. Middle East Online published the US Military has identified Internet Social Networks as a modern day forum for the facilitation and advancement of military agendas. Subsequently, the torrent waged against the credibility and truthfulness of the Goldstone report was meticulously carried out as witnessed by the article ‘Leyden Communications Helps Israel On UN Goldstone Report’ http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/. The Goldstone Report represents the highest and most prestigious leverage of the Palestinian initiative throughout their 60 years of oppression and genocide. Without any reservation or doubt such is clearly understood by both Israel and the United States of America’s leadership.
Furthermore, Israel’s purchase of Internet Domains employed to deflect and impede informed opinions worldwide, employed along with Israel’s sophisticated use of Facebook, search engines and similar webpage themes served to squash almost anything remotely critical of Israel in what little information was made available to the American public: http://www.israelnewsagency.com/. Sun Tzu said: Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.
It seems that the lessons and power of the media employed by Hitler against the Jews has been an education well learned and embraced in this century by the “Chickens who have come home to roost!” Although this provides a formidable challenge for those who are desirous of a level playing field, equity and some utopian sense of fairness, we must understand that this is about domination and power. So, the Arab nations must somehow find the necessary stuff to cooperatively pool their resources to combat this in the UN General Assembly, the cyber-space of our collective minds and in the complex of courts made available to sovereign nations, NGO’s and monies available by the Gulf Cooperation Council financial war coffers.
Palestinian resistance must surely see they cannot overcome Israel through direct confrontational stages of traditional war. President Bush has declared that this is a global war on terror and borrowing from the infamous line of Michael Corleone in Godfather II, “If history has shown us anything, it shows us that you can kill anybody.” I am reminded of the question raised during the 1960’s civil rights era in the United States, “..who should we follow, Martin Luther King or Malcolm X.” Forthcoming was a response along the lines, “There are many roads to freedom and they all must be traveled.” I now conclude the Palestinians do not need more martyrs, rather what is required is wise and cunning leadership with intestinal fortitude coupled with vision.
Ideology of Sun Tzu finds expression in the Palestinian resistance when we first realize “The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.” The Israeli oppressor of the Nation of Palestine did also murder Jesus Christ and declared they had done God a service; committed genocide throughout the 20th Century and savagely holds on until this day, to madness and power. We must all thoughtfully reflect and consider that we are not dealing with a reasonable nation and consequently shift our attention to more profitable lines of deliberation and assertiveness.
What lies at issue are the public relations deceptions perpetuated by the Zionist media that, “Lest we forget” they are going to shove 60 more years of their nobility under duress message across the airwaves, [http://intifada-palestine.com]. Neither the Palestinian peoples nor their supporters to my knowledge have published the picture of what a free sovereign Palestine would look like. Why do we not follow the lead of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he spoke before the United Nations about governance that reflects the highest aims of Islam, “… men should pursue to be governed by the spiritual laws set forth within the context of the highest aims in the lives of men to be: “Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek good, virtue, perfection, and beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection.” Let this be the Nation of Palestine’s’ message to the world lest we forget all war is deception.”
Bishop Don Corder
Don Corder is presiding bishop for Spirit of Life International Believers Fellowship and Senior Pastor of the Pillar of Truth Ministries. Mr. Corder is a published author, grassroots organizer and community activist, in addition to his work in urban and international development as a business consultant and entrepreneur.
Email: Corder.Donald@yahoo.com
Omar Barghouti: The Need to Boycott Israel (Part 1)
Talk plus discussion/debate by Barghouti, organizer of PACBI (the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel). Filmed at the U of Minnesota, 11/2009.”
Dr. Haider Eid On BDS MOVEMENT
Edited: Elias Farhud
We think that the only solution to bring this conflict to an end caused by the establishment of a racist Apartheid state is only through democratic means by de-Zionizing the state of Israel and making it a state for all of its citizens disregarding race, religion, ethnicity or gender…says Dr. Haider Eid
Dialogue : Could you speak to us about the origins and the objectives of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions ?
Haidar Eid : The BDS call originated in 2004 when the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel was launched. In 2005, the BNC, or BDS National Committee, was launched combining more than 170 Palestinian civil society orgs that endorsed the BDS call. Now, almost all Palestinian civil society networks, including Islamic and national political organizations, have endorsed the BDS call. The BNC acts as a representative for all these civil society movements that have endorsed the call.
The main objective behind BDS is first, putting an end to the Israeli military occupation of the Gaza Strip [GS] and the West Bank [WB], fighting against the policy of colonization and Apartheid as practiced by Israel against the indigenous population of Palestine of 1948.
Dialogue : All Palestinians claiming the right of return are, by this very fact, boycotting the state of Israel , founded on a policy of ethnic cleansing and purging which our paper, along with others, has tirelessly denounced since its beginning. However, among partisans of the boycott (institutions, certain states, religions), some wish to pressure Israel into becoming a democratic state. Is such a perspective conceivable? You are a partisan of the single-state solution. How can the BDS campaign be associated with this demand ?
Haidar Eid : As a One Democratic State supporter, it is amongst the corollaries of such a belief that Israel is a settler colonialist, Apartheid state and the methods- or, tools of struggle- used against Apartheid South Africa can be used as a model in our struggle against Apartheid Israel. Transforming of Israel from an ethno-religious Apartheid state into a democracy should be the objective of every single person believing in liberal democracy in general. And, therefore, we think that the only solution to bring this conflict to an end caused by the establishment of a racist Apartheid state is only through democratic means by de-Zionising the state of Israel and making it a state for all of its citizens disregarding race, religion, ethnicity or gender.
With pressure imposed by the international community through a BDS campaign a la anti-Apartheid campaign which brought Apartheid South Africa to an end, we believe that Israel itself can be transformed into a secular democratic state after the return of 6 million Palestinian refugees who were ethnically cleansed in 1948, a state fro ALL of its citizens.
Dialogue : A parallel is often drawn with South Africa . Yet, in South Africa, wasn’t it fear of a popular uprising, fear of a violent end to the apartheid regime that pushed the UN and largely the USA to demand reforms to save the essential, i.e. South African capitalism ? There are many South African activists who believe that the Kempton Park negotiations actually saved the economic power of the whites by putting some blacks in power. What is your view on this ?
Haidar Eid : I tend to agree with this analysis and I think that in South Africa we have witnessed an end to political Apartheid, but, unfortunately, we have not witnessed yet the end of economic Apartheid. I believe it is the task of conscious progressive powers in South Africa now to uphold the original principles defended by the Freedom Charter. Unfortunately, the struggle of the Black masses of South Africa had definitely been hijacked by Black fat cats. But, the agenda now is purely social. Whereas as the South African struggle has managed to bring Apartheid South Africa to an end, it has failed to come up with a new agenda that guarantees the socio-economic rights of the majority of Black masses of South Africa . In other words, yes South Africa has fallen within the trap of what Frantz Fanon calls the pitfalls of national (racial) consciousness, by prioritizing race over class.
Dialogue : We are asking these questions because in the west the most active partisans of the 2-states solution (a solution which we consider incompatible with the right of return) have made the BDS campaign their own. The professed 2-states solution would imply Israel ’s establishing of official borders, which is incompatible with Zionism, which by definition is predatory and expansionist. Furthermore, isn’t the boycott question itself intended to lead to satisfying the democratic rights of the Palestinian people – including of course the Palestinians of 1948 – which is also incompatible with Zionism ?
Haidar Eid : Absolutely. I fully agree with this analysis and that is why one of the major slogans of the BDS campaign defended by all those who have endorsed the above mentioned BDS call in 2005, in fact call for the end of the policy of Apartheid practiced against the Palestinians of 1948. More so, as One State activists, we strongly believe that the struggles of the Palestinian people whether in 1948 or in 1967, that is to say the WB and GS, or even in the Diaspora is inseparable and we believe that the contemporary Palestinian national project fails to address all these concerns. That is why we think that our alternative that can provide all Palestinians with a solution that guarantees the right of return and equality for the 1948 inhabitants, whether Jews, Muslims or Christians. The problem with the Oslo ideology is that it traces back the origin of the Palestinian question to the 1967 war which actually means establishing a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, a state fro Muslim and Christian Palestinians; we believe that this is a racist solution par excellence. And, therefore, we think that one of the major tools of the struggle towards a secular democratic state is BDS. But, BDS is only one form of civil resistance, which is one pillar of the four pillars of the struggle that the South African anti-Apartheid movement defended and defined eloquently in their literature.
Dr. Haidar Eid
Haidar Eid: We, Palestinians, are absolutely fed up with the so-called “International Community”. Has the Geneva Durban Review Conference been a failure? Well, if we still believe in the role of Western governments, especially those with colonial legacy, in playing a positive role vis-à-vis the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, we are, then, fooling ourselves. It is the power of people that we must bank on, exactly like what happened against Apartheid South Africa, where a sustained global BDS campaign forced the same governments to boycott the Pretoria racist regime. Durban II was a reminder that whether it was Bush, or Obama, the Empire is the same.
One of the major differences between crimes committed by the South Africa apartheid regime and those of apartheid Israel is the way, as evidenced by the Durban Review Conference sham, the latter gets away with its crimes equipped with unprecedented impunity. Israel could not have carried out its genocidal war on the people of Gaza without a green light from the international community.
The idea of the citizen in Israel is totally missing. Israel is the only state in the ’modern’ world in which citizenship and nationality are two separate, independent concepts. Israel is NOT the state of its citizens, but the state of the Jewish People. Moreover, Israel does not have a constitution. So, these are the FACTS avoided by those countries that have boycotted, or hijacked the Durban Review conference. Unsurprisingly, most, if not all, of these countries are, historically, either racist, settler-colonialist, or have a legacy of slavery.
Related Links
Interview with single-state activist Dr. Haider Eid
Israel declares Gaza “enemy entity”
Boycott, divestment & sanctions
Sources:
Dialogue-review.com
Electronic Intifada
Could Obama’s Apparent Surrender to the Zionist Lobby Turn out to be Good for Justice and Peace?
By Alan Hart
November 19,2009
I’m quite strongly inclined to the view that the answer is “No”, but the question is still worth asking. It was triggered in my mind by a phrase in the introduction to the lead story of the BBC’s World Service (Radio) news bulletins late on 17 November and early the following morning. The story was the Obama’s administration’s “dismay” at Israel’s decision to approve 900 new homes in occupied Arab East Jerusalem “in defiance of world opinion”. The words emphasized were those of a BBC scriptwriter, not a spokesman for the Obama administration.
They reflected the fact that many if not most peoples of the nations of the world (so-called ordinary folk) are becoming increasingly fed up with Israel’s arrogance of power, its contempt for international law and its appalling self-righteousness and, also, are beginning to see the Zionist state for what it really is – the prime obstacle to peace, because of its preference for more and more land rather than peace.
Could it be that in the quietness of his unspoken mind, President Obama is counting on this growing anti-Israel sentiment, if and when it takes hold in America, to give him the freedom to respond to Netanyahu’s two-fingered gestures by taking on the Zionist lobby’s stooges in Congress?
Put another way, is it possible that Obama can live for the time being with the humiliation Netanyahu is heaping upon him because he believes that the Zionist state will so overplay its hand that it will alienate even Americans, enough of them to make it possible for him to do whatever is necessary to oblige Israel to be serious about peace on terms virtually all Palestinians and most other Arabs and Muslims everywhere could accept?
On this occasion, I’m not answering the question. Only asking it.
Alan Hart
Alan Hart is a former ITN and BBC Panorama foreign correspondent who covered wars and conflicts wherever they were taking place in the world and specialized in the Middle East. Author of Zionism: The Real Enemy of the Jews: The False Messiah (Zionism, the Real Enemy of the Jews). He blogs on www.alanhart.net and tweets on www.twitter.com/alanauthor
See also:
President Obama’s opportunity to speak truth to power: Part 1
President Obama’s opportunity to speak truth to power – Rahm Emanuel does it for him – Part 11
Open Letter to President Obama: Change the Rules of the Game
Israeli Jews and the One-State Solution
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada
At the height of the global anti-apartheid movement, in 1989, a bus in London displays a message calling for boycott of South Africa. (Rahul D'Lucca)
Anyone who rejects the two-state solution, won’t bring a one-state solution. They will instead bring one war, not one state. A bloody war with no end. — Israeli President Shimon Peres, 7 November 2009.
One of the most commonly voiced objections to a one-state solution for Palestine/Israel stems from the accurate observation that the vast majority of Israeli Jews reject it, and fear being “swamped” by a Palestinian majority. Across the political spectrum, Israeli Jews insist on maintaining a separate Jewish-majority state.
But with the total collapse of the Obama Administration’s peace efforts, and relentless Israeli colonization of the occupied West Bank, the reality is dawning rapidly that the two-state solution is no more than a slogan that has no chance of being implemented or altering the reality of a de facto binational state in Palestine/Israel.
This places an obligation on all who care about the future of Palestine/Israel to seriously consider the democratic alternatives. I have long argued that the systems in post-apartheid South Africa (a unitary democratic state), and Northern Ireland (consociational democracy) — offer hopeful, real-life models.
But does solid Israeli Jewish opposition to a one-state solution mean that a peaceful one-state outcome is so unlikely that Palestinians should not pursue it, and should instead focus only on “pragmatic” solutions that would be less fiercely resisted by Israeli Jews?
The experience in South Africa suggests otherwise. In 1994, white-minority rule — apartheid — came to a peaceful, negotiated end, and was replaced (after a transitional period of power-sharing) with a unitary democratic state with a one person, one vote system. Before this happened, how likely did this outcome look? Was there any significant constituency of whites prepared to contemplate it, and what if the African National Congress (ANC) had only advanced political solutions that whites told pollsters they would accept?
Until close to the end of apartheid, the vast majority of whites, including many of the system’s liberal critics, completely rejected a one person, one vote system, predicting that any attempt to impose it would lead to a bloodbath. As late as 1989, F.W. de Klerk, South Africa’s last apartheid president, described a one person, one vote system as the “death knell” for South Africa.
A 1988 study by political scientist Pierre Hugo documented the widespread fears among South African whites that a transition to majority rule would entail not only a loss of political power and socioeconomic status, but engendered “physical dread” and fear of “violence, total collapse, expulsion and flight.” Successive surveys showed that four out of five whites thought that majority rule would threaten their “physical safety.” Such fears were frequently heightened by common racist tropes of inherently savage and violent Africans, but the departure of more than a million white colons from Algeria and the airlifting of 300,000 whites from Angola during decolonization set terrifying precedents (“Towards darkness and death: racial demonology in South Africa,” The Journal of Modern African Studies, 26(4), 1988).
Throughout the 1980s, polls showed that even as whites increasingly understood that apartheid could not last, only a small minority ever supported majority rule and a one person, one vote system. In a March 1986 survey, for example, 47 percent of whites said they would favor some form of “mixed-race” government, but 83 percent said they would opt for continued white domination of the government if they had the choice (Peter Goodspeed, “Afrikaners cling to their all-white dream,” The Toronto Star, 5 October 1986).
A 1990 nationwide survey of Afrikaner whites (native speakers of Afrikaans, as opposed to English, and who traditionally formed the backbone of the apartheid state), found just 2.2 percent were willing to accept a “universal franchise with majority rule” (Kate Manzo and Pat McGowan, “Afrikaner fears and the politics of despair: Understanding change in South Africa,” International Studies Quarterly, 36, 1992).
Perhaps an enlightened white elite was able to lead the white masses to higher ground? This was not the case either. A 1988 academic survey of more than 400 white politicians, business and media leaders, top civil servants, academics and clergy found that just 4.8 percent were prepared to accept a unitary state with a universal voting franchise and two-thirds considered such an outcome “unacceptable.” According to Manzo and McGowan, white elites reflected the sentiments and biases of the rest of the society and overwhelmingly considered whites inherently more civilized and culturally superior to black Africans. Just more than half of prominent whites were prepared to accept “a federal state in which power is shared between white and non-white groups and areas so that no one group dominates.”
During the 1980s, the white electorate in South Africa moved to the right, as Israel’s Jewish electorate is doing today. Support seeped from the National Party, which had established formal apartheid in 1948, to the even more extreme Conservative Party. Yet, “on the issue of majority rule,” Hugo observed, “supporters of the National Party and the Conservative Party, as well as most white voters to the ‘left’ of these organizations, ha[d] little quarrel with each other.”
The vast majority of whites, wracked with existential fears, were simply unable to contemplate relinquishing effective control, or at least a veto, over political decision-making in South Africa.
Yet, the African National Congress insisted firmly on a one person, one vote system with no white veto. As the township protests and strikes and international pressure mounted, The Economist observed in an extensive 1986 survey of South Africa published on 1 February of that year, that many “enlightened” whites “still fondly argue that a dramatic improvement in the quality of black life may take the revolutionary sting out of the black townships — and persuade ‘responsible’ blacks, led by the emergent black middle class, to accept some power-sharing formula.”
Schemes to stabilize the apartheid system abounded, and bear a strong resemblance to the current Israeli government’s vision of “economic peace” in which a collaborationist Palestinian Authority leadership would manage a still-subjugated Palestinian population anesthetized by consumer goods and shopping malls.
Because of the staunch opposition of whites to a unitary democratic state, the ANC heard no shortage of advice from western liberals that it should seek a “realistic” political accommodation with the apartheid regime, and that no amount of pressure could force whites to succumb to the ANC’s political demands. The ANC was warned that insistence on majority rule would force Afrikaners into the “laager” — they would retreat into a militarized garrison state and siege economy, preferring death before surrender.
Even the late Helen Suzman, one of apartheid’s fiercest liberal critics, predicted in 1987, as quoted by Hugo, “The Zimbabwe conflict took 15 years … and cost 20,000 lives and I can assure you that the South African transfer of power will take a good deal more than that, both in time and I am afraid lives.”
But as The Economist observed, the view that whites would prefer “collective suicide” was something of a caricature. The vast majority of Afrikaners were “no longer bible-thumping boers.” They were “part of a spoilt, affluent suburban society, whose economic pain threshold may prove to be rather low.”
The Economist concluded that if whites would only come so far voluntarily, then it was perfectly reasonable for the anti-apartheid movement to bring them the rest of the way through “coercion” in the form of sanctions and other forms of pressure. “The quicker the white tribe submits,” the magazine wrote, “the better its chance of a bearable future in a black-ruled South Africa.”
Ultimately, as we now know, the combination of internal resistance and international isolation did force whites to abandon political apartheid and accept majority rule. However, it is important to note that the combined strength of the anti-apartheid movement never seriously threatened the physical integrity of the white regime.
Even after the massive township uprisings of 1985-86, the South African regime was secure. “So far there is no real physical threat to white power,” The Economist noted, “so far there is little threat to white lives. … The white state is mighty, and well-equipped. It has the capacity to repress the township revolts far more bloodily. The blacks have virtually no urban or rural guerrilla capacity, practically no guns, few safe havens within South Africa or without.”
This balance never changed, and a similar equation could be written today about the relative power of a massively-armed — and much more ruthless — Israeli state, and lightly armed Palestinian resistance factions.
What did change for South Africa, and what all the weapons in the world were not able to prevent, was the complete loss of legitimacy of the apartheid regime and its practices. Once this legitimacy was gone, whites lost the will to maintain a system that relied on repression and violence and rendered them international pariahs; they negotiated a way out and lived to tell the tale. It all happened much more quickly and with considerably less violence than even the most optimistic predictions of the time. But this outcome could not have been predicted based on what whites said they were willing to accept, and it would not have occurred had the ANC been guided by opinion polls rather than the democratic principles of the Freedom Charter.
Zionism — as many Israelis openly worry — is suffering a similar, terminal loss of legitimacy as Israel is ever more isolated as a result of its actions. Israel’s self-image as a liberal “Jewish and democratic state” is proving impossible to maintain against the reality of a militarized, ultra-nationalist Jewish sectarian settler-colony that must carry out frequent and escalating massacres of “enemy” civilians (Lebanon and Gaza 2006, Gaza 2009) in a losing effort to check the resistance of the region’s indigenous people. Zionism cannot bomb, kidnap, assassinate, expel, demolish, settle and lie its way to legitimacy and acceptance.
Already difficult to disguise, the loss of legitimacy becomes impossible to conceal once Palestinians are a demographic majority ruled by a Jewish minority. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that Palestinians recognize Israel’s “right to exist as a Jewish state” is in effect an acknowledgement of failure: without Palestinian consent, something which is unlikely ever to be granted, the Zionist project of a Jewish ethnocracy in Palestine has grim long-term prospects.
Similarly, South African whites typically attempted to justify their opposition to democracy, not in terms of a desire to preserve their privilege and power, but using liberal arguments about protecting distinctive cultural differences. Hendrik Verwoerd Jr., the son of assassinated Prime Minister Hendrik Verwoerd, apartheid’s founder, expressed the problem in these terms in 1986, as reported by The Toronto Star, stating that, “These two people, the Afrikaner and the black, are not capable of becoming one nation. Our differences are unique, cultural and deep. The only way a man can be happy, can live in peace, is really when he is among his own people, when he shares cultural values.”
The younger Verwoerd was on the far-right of South African politics, leading a quixotic effort to carve out a whites-only homeland in the heart of South Africa. But his reasoning sounds remarkably similar to liberal Zionist defenses of the “two-state solution” today. The Economist clarified the use of such language at the time, stating that “One of the weirder products of apartheid is the crippling of language in a maw of hypocrisy, euphemism and sociologese. You talk about the Afrikaner ‘right to self-determination’ — meaning power over everybody else.”
Zionism’s claim for “Jewish self-determination” amidst an intermixed population, is in effect a demand to preserve and legitimize a status quo in which Israeli Jews exercise power in perpetuity. But there’s little reason to expect that Israeli Jews would abandon this quest voluntarily any more than South African whites did. As in South Africa, coercion is necessary — and the growing boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement is one of the most powerful, nonviolent, legitimate and proven tools of coercion that Palestinians possess. Israel’s vulnerabilities may be different from those of apartheid South Africa, but Israel is not invulnerable to pressure.
Coercion is not enough, however; as I have long argued, and sought to do, Palestinians must also put forward a positive vision. Neither can Palestinians advocating a one-state solution simply disregard the views of Israeli Jews. We must recognize that the opposition of Israeli Jews to any solution that threatens their power and privilege stems from at least two sources. One is irrational, racist fears of black and brown hordes (in this case, Arab Muslims) stoked by decades of colonial, racist demonization. The other source — certainly heightened by the former — are normal human concerns about personal and family dislocation, loss of socioeconomic status and community security: change is scary.
But change will come. Without indulging Israeli racism or preserving undue privilege, the legitimate concerns of ordinary Israeli Jews can be addressed directly in any negotiated transition to ensure that the shift to democracy is orderly, and essential redistributive policies are carried out fairly. Inevitably, decolonization will cause some pain as Israeli Jews lose power and privilege, but there are few reasons to believe it cannot be a well-managed process, or that the vast majority of Israeli Jews, like white South Africans, would not be prepared to make the adjustment for the sake of a normality and legitimacy they cannot have any other way.
This is where the wealth of research and real-life experience about the successes, failures, difficulties and opportunities of managing such transitions at the level of national and local politics, neighborhoods, schools and universities, workplaces, state institutions and policing, emerging from South Africa and Northern Ireland, will be of enormous value.
Every situation has unique features, and although there are patterns in history, it never repeats itself exactly. But what we can conclude from studying the pasts and presents of others is that Palestinians and Israelis are no less capable of writing themselves a post-colonial future that gives everyone a chance at a life worth living in a single, democratic state.
Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.
War Illussions
By Sami Moubayed
Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine in Syria. He is also a writer, political analyst, and historian, based in Damascus.
Shortly after the Israel Defence Forces claimed that it had captured a ship allegedly filled with Iranian weapons meant for the Hezbollah, Israeli Chief of General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi said Hezbollah had rockets with a 320-kilometre range that could reach into the Israeli heartland.
On November 11, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah corrected him, saying that all of Israel, not only its south, was within the range of Hezbollah rockets — raising fears that a new confrontation could soon break out along the Lebanese-Israeli border. A closer look, however, proves that it was not as imminent as it may seem. Simply put: Israel is not ready, the US is not enthusiastic and international heavyweights, like Saudi Arabia and Russia, would not allow it.
Over the past two years, Israel has been violating international law with repeated over-flights above Lebanon and sending espionage cells into Lebanese territory, including listening devices into the south last October. According to the UN, both sides “remain committed to full implementation” of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon noted that repeated violations across the border highlight how fragile the situation is, raising fears that it could deteriorate any minute.
Sources close to Hezbollah confirm that the Lebanese party is busy reinforcing fixed defence positions north of the Litani River, protecting the routes to Beirut and the Beka’a Valley, claiming that if war is to break out, Hezbollah is prepared not only to fight back, as it did in 2006, but to delve deep into northern Israel, capturing Jewish colonies along the border. If that happens, they add, this would certainly bring down the Netanyahu government. The ground would be too soft for Israeli tanks to venture this winter, sources add, pushing the likelihood of a confrontation to next spring.
Impediments
There are natural obstacles to a new round of battle between Hezbollah and Israel. One is the presence of UN peacekeeping forces along the border, who had their mandate renewed earlier this year, along with a lack of a proper pretext for the Israelis to strike at Hezbollah, which has been observing 1701. Israel can, of course, use the ship affair to justify striking at Lebanon once again, although it is difficult to see what that would achieve, except set the region ablaze — drowning all the moderation brought around by Barack Obama.
Israel, however, realises that it cannot bomb Hezbollah out of existence. Far from eliminating Hezbollah, such a war, were it to break out, would be targeted at Iran more than Lebanon. The Lebanese party, despite all attempts, is still firmly united and has not been infiltrated by Israeli spies. Had this been the case, then Israel would have managed to penetrate them long ago. Let us not forget that for years, the only kind of intelligence both countries got on Iran was from various unreliable sources: Iranians in the Diaspora loyal to the Shah, Saudi Arabia, Saddam Hussain and Lebanese proxies like the “South Lebanon Army”. None of them knew for sure how powerful the Iranian giant really was. Real intelligence, after all, is always gathered by embassies — which are official channels of espionage, recognised by the international community since the 16th century. The US and Israel have not had embassies in Iran since 1979.
The only logical explanation for such a war would be to test the pulse of the Iranians, preparing for a Plan B in case Obama’s engagement hit a brick wall with Tehran. Obama, for that matter, is not too enthusiastic about a non-state player in the Middle East, over which he has absolutely no control. He would not mind an assault that breaks or weakens Hezbollah to prevent the snowballing of non-state players modelled after Hezbolla, in failed states like Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Palestine, Afghanistan, or Iraq.
Not now, however. Not before Obama delivers on the Middle East process and gets his domestic house in order.
One suggestion on how to deal with Hezbollah is to lure them into power, as was the case with Hamas after 2006, and Fatah, before them, after Oslo. Only when they capture the state will they cease to operate as a state-within-a-state, where they will be eager to be recognised by the international community as statesmen rather than guerrilla leaders. Nasrallah personally is very aware of this danger and insists that Hezbollah wants to hold on to both sides of the stick — assume their respected allocation in the Lebanese system, while maintaining their arms and right to fight the Israelis. He realises very well that power corrupts and this explains why in the newly-born Lebanese cabinet, Hezbollah has no more than two technical portfolios — agriculture and administrative reforms. Since the option of taming Hezbollah through power does not stand for now, the world is clueless on how to deal with Hezbollah. Politically, they remain as powerful as ever, having managed to dictate all of their demands.
The will for war is therefore present, although the logistics of such a war and the logic behind it remain very abstract and difficult to justify for the Israelis. And so long as dialogue is still ongoing — no matter how sluggishly — between the US and Iran, war is probably not in the immediate horizon between Lebanon and Israel.
This article appeared in Gulf News entitled, “The imminence of war is an illusion.”
The Zionist Con Game in America
By Paul J. Balles
17 November 2009
NTNU Norway – Proposes Academic Boycott of Israel
Paul J. Balles views the twisted logic and demeaning tone of American Zionists who casually falsify history and dismiss the rights of the Palestinian people in defence of Israel.
Several days ago (9 November 2009), David Harris, Executive Director of the American Jewish Committee, wrote an article for the Huffington Post complaining that later this month the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), will consider a proposed boycott of Israel.
His complaint is typical of the kind of twisted logic used by American Zionists to advance Israel’s causes. He asks:
Why the call for the boycott? The appeal’s first sentence says it all: “Since 1948, the state of Israel has occupied Palestinian land and denied the Palestinians basic human rights.” The boycott should continue until there “is an end to the occupation.”
The caustic attitude and demeaning tone appears to deny the truth in the statement. Both Israelis and American Zionists have been dismissive of any Palestinian rights since the terrorist Irgun and Stern Gang’s insurrection against British rule and terrorist slaughter of Palestinians.
Harris continues: “It (NTNU) goes on to accuse Israeli academics, among other alleged misdeeds, of developing “Zionist ideology and renouncing Palestinian history and identity.”
“There you have it,” he groans. “Israel is deemed illegal. It has no right to exist. Until it disappears from the face of the earth, it must be treated as a pariah nation, so radioactive as to be untouchable.”
Harris admits that “at least the petitioners are being honest”, complaining that “More often, we’re treated to deliberately vague slogans such as ‘end the occupation’, without any specificity.” Israel has no right to occupy Palestine. It is a pariah nation; and it is radioactive!
The sarcasm persists: “Do these calls refer to 1948, the year of Israel’s establishment, or 1967, the year Israel fought a war of self-defence and, in winning, acquired territory it then expected to trade for a peace agreement? It can be hard, if not impossible, to tell.”
The audacity of his reference to 1948 as “the year of Israel’s establishment” purposely ignores 9 April 1948, when the Jewish Irgun terrorist group attacked Deir Yassin, Palestine, murdering 254 women and children captured in the village. Israel’s terrorist founders caused thousands of Palestinians to flee for their lives as refugees.
Harris indulges himself in self-righteousness by referring to “1967 [as] the year Israel fought a war of self-defence and, in winning, acquired territory”. He distorts history by pretending the 1967 war was not meticulously planned by Israel many years before.
“Of all the nations in the world, according to these Norwegian luminaries, only Israel has no legitimacy and must be ostracized,” says Harris, attempting to legitimize Israel with several ludicrous historical twists:
Obviously, the ancient Hebrew presence, the continuous link between the Jewish people and the land, the Balfour Declaration, the League of Nations mandate, and the votes of the UN Special Committee on Palestine and the UN General Assembly have no bearing, though they provide a legal and historical foundation for statehood far exceeding that of many countries.
One need only consider the deceptive claim about the “ancient Hebrew presence, the continuous link between the Jewish people and the land…” The reader of Harris’s diatribe is supposed to ignore the ancient Palestinian presence and their continuous link to the same land.
However, in the most irrational bluff, Harris argues:
@@In reality, if the petitioners were truly concerned about sovereign legitimacy, they might begin by asking how many countries in the world today were established by violent conquest. And how many were created by politicians in distant capitals dispassionately drawing and redrawing boundaries in far-off lands?@@
In the twisted logic of Zionist deceit, other’s wrongs justify Israel’s. Others cheated! Why pick on us? Because you’re guilty.
Paul Balles
* Paul J. Balles is a retired American university professor and freelance writer who has lived in the Middle East for many years. For more information, see http://www.pballes.com.
Israel killed John Kennedy- JFK??.
By Hesham Tillawi Ph.d.
more about “Israel killed John F. Kennedy“, posted with vodpod
JFK and RFK died trying to stop the Zionists from controling America
Dr. Hesham Tillawi
Dr. Hesham Tillawi has a Ph.D. in International Relations. He is a Palestinian American writer, Political Analyst and a TV and Radio Talk Show Host. His program Current issues with Hesham Tillawi can be viewed Live every Thursday evening at 6:30PM Central Standard Time on Cox Cable system Channel 15 in Louisiana, Nationwide on Bridges TV, and Worldwide on Amazonas Satellite, as well as Live on the Internet at http://www.currentissues.tv
He can be contacted at tillawi@currentissues.tv Interviews then archived for on demand viewing at www.currentissues.tv Radio show broadcast on RBN www.republicbroadcasting.org every Saturday at 4-6 PM Central Time
-
Headlines
Featured Articles
In Jon we trust - By: Maidhc Ó Cathail
Why The Goldstone Report Matters - By: Richard Falk
Tragedy at Ft. Hood: A catalyst for change? - By: Dr. Alan Sabrosky
How Israel Wages Game Theory Warfare - By: Jeff Gates
The Pirates of Zion: Obama misses the boat! - By: Dr. Alan Sabrosky*
AIPAC Sends in the Clowns! - By Franklin Lamb
Zionism’s Jewish Enemy - By: Alan Hart
How the Israel Lobby Took Control of U.S. Foreign Policy - By: Jeff Gates
They're out to get us! - Israel distorts the world - By: Dr. Alan Sabrosky
How Zionist Lobby Stooges in Congress Brought Shame to their Institution - By: Alan Hart
Israel’s Fifth Column: The People in Between - By: Jeff Gates
An Appeal to the American People - By: Alan Hart
Can Obama escape the dominating influence of AIPAC and the American Jewish/Zionist Lobby? - By: Debbie Menon
Anti-Zionists: The New Heretics - By: Jeff Gates
Body Snatchers Are Back - By: Israel Shamir
Cynthia Mckinney held in detention center refused to sign Israeli deportation papers
Each persons peace is as important as my peace. May all beings in the world experience peace, harmony, laughter, and love. May all beings be fed, be sheltered, be loved, be at peace. Today I can only hold these thoughts, this prayer.
Patricia Blair
Many members of the U.S. Congress have sold their votes to AIPAC for Israel. Consequently, the U.S. will subsidize the decimation of the Palestinians and the cruelty of Israel until some one else buys them for Palestine. Words of the U.S. are empty. The deeds of Israel tell all.
Cathy Regan
Appeasing Israel – At What Cost ?
The Guardian Newspaper is publishing this week a report from Palestine on the subject of the settlements From the various interviews it is clear that a majority of the settlers are comparative newcomers (Like their foreign Minister) with a fanatical belief in the right of Jews to the land of Israel/Palestine as confirmed by the Old Testament I don’t like to tread on beliefs….”tread softly for you tread on my dreams” but there is no hope of reconciliation with such creationist nonsense and bigotry.
Israel must be brought to the conference table and forced into a morally just position by American and European threats to withdraw financial aid. Boycotts played a huge part in bringing to an end apartheid in South Africa
I hope to be broadcasting my monologue Bitter Fruit of Palestine on YouTube shortly as my small contribution to the cause.
Watch this space
Richard Morris
Congressmen tell Israelis: Obama’s approach “troubling”
Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor is trying to keep mended Republican fences and bridges with Israel and Israeli influence, albeit as a US Representative to congress his utterance of such statements outside the House and especially to a foreign audience border misuse of Office if not treason.
It is important to expose the methods which they employ in their chicanery, such as their trip to Israel for personal and party political purposes, which are done in the bad interest of and contrary to US policy as set by the Executive Branch.
Congressman Eric Cantor and his friends treacherous and underhanded methods should be brought before the general public. This is the kind of stuff that should be archived and brought out again at Election time to defeat Cantor and every incumbent Republican Congressman who accompanied him on the trip, and every candidate who carried his next political campaign to Tel Aviv looking for vote$ and support!
- Debbie Menon -
*****************What is troubling is the Zionist AIPAC apparent control over Americas Congress. Israel is trying to push America into a war with Iran. That would be a disaster! Please wake up and take back our American Government.
- Patricia Blair -
I find Rep.Eric Cantor's remarks deeply disturbing, almost treasonous in his obvious efforts to defend Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine and the ever expanding illegal Israeli settlements and violation of the Palestinian human rights.
In regards to Obama questioning the illegal eviction of two Palestinian families, Rep. Cantor goes on to say," I'm very troubled by that, because I don't think we in America would want another country telling us how to implement and execute our laws.
It is obvious that the voters of the state that Rep. Cantor represents should immediately recall him as he obvious represents Israel's interests over Americas. Thinking Americans definitely do not want Zionist dictating policy terms to our Congress or President.
Patricia Blair
***************
“Butchers: The Hidden Truth About Israel’s Kidney Theft Ring!”
An interesting insight on the illegal activities of the Israeli government. It would appear that an International Jewish Mafia is in control. and that Israel and Zionism are merely a cover for a gigantic and worldwide mob operation.
How nice... to own your own country where you and your mob can operate immune from law enforcement because you own the law.
Earlaiman
“Global Elders? Counsel of Elders? “Where They Are?”"
Where are the "Elders?"
They are there.... they may be hidden in the clouds or buried in the depths, or obscured by the lies and deceptions which pass today for history and "News" created ad lib by and for Special Interests on demand.
But Truth is durable and it will survive. The elders will prevail for they are the purveyors of Truth.
In my lifetime I have been, among other things, a submariner and an aviator. I’ve learned a few fundamentals about operating both vehicles. Not wisdom, just plain facts, obvious and ignored at your peril.
Fundamental:
1. Every submarine which dives, must surface. If it doesn’t, you are dead.
2. An airplane, which goes up in one piece, must come down in pretty much the same way. If it doesn’t, you are at serious risk.
Both of these vehicles can be hidden, disguised, and tactically deployed in ways which tend to obscure and con-ceal their presence, objectives and power.
They are not unlike Truth in those respects.
Similarly, Truth is much like both the submarine and the airplane in many ways.
Once submerged, it is a matter of time until it surfaces. Unlike a number of submarines, it has rarely failed to do so.
It may have gathered marine growth, barnacles, weed, etc., and its paint may have faded and ablated from im-mersion but, clean it up, scrape off the surface and the truth will be revealed.
Launch a Truth, and fly as far and high as you may, safely back on the ground, you will find the same Truth that was launched.
Inevitably, Truth will return to the land or the surface. What goes up... must come down! Be patient.
Modern truth, like modern submarines and airplanes, has remarkable endurance and may remain gone for so long, dive so deep and fly so far and high that we may begin to think it has been lost.
But, Truth, unlike submarines and airplanes, cannot be depthcharged, torpedoed or shot out of the skies. It is made of much sterner stuff.
Inevitably, it will return, and again become apparent in all its shining reality.
Stick with the truth and you will survive the passage, the flight, and the battle.
Abandon Truth, or give up the wait, and it’s sink, swim, or pray the parachute works.
Lies and bullshit do not make good parachutes, lifejackets or rafts.
Hang around. Be patent. The truth is out there, and it will surface or land in its own good time.
Mr. Bush, or his navigator Mr. Cheney, may or may not be in command when it returns. Stranger things have happened at sea and in the sky...but, I assure you, Truth is on its way home and will arrive...in its own good time.
Whether we celebrate a homecoming or a wake is yet to be seen. But, we shall see, shan’t we?
but the ?Elders there will always be the Elders, and they will always bear the Truth!
Earlaiman
***************
There are small glimmers of hope when one surveys the global media’s terrain and reads France suspending the licenses of Israel acquisitions of weapons that were used in the Gaza Holocaust or Saudi Arabia decrying the Israeli abandon of meaningful strides towards peace in the Middle East or the Brazilian government’s reprimand of Israeli officials as they embarked upon a South American public relations charade; while yet abandoning all semblance of human decency at home in their Palestinian affairs.
The quiet voice of sanity uttered by the global elders is not altogether falling on deaf or unlearned hearing. What is missing is passion and vision for leadership by the Arab Americans in championing their own cause, when they are abandoned by a largely self-serving United States populace and an immoral government; no longer for the people nor by the people when considering the immeasurable gulf between the will of the people and the failure to have healthcare reform legislation before the American congress went home on their August vacations.
Their must be a marshalling of forces and ideas from a motivated Arabic grassroots constituency as the US military now quietly reviews use of social networks as we voice the sound of our discontent.
Don Corder
***************
***************We are caught in a strange predicament in the USA regarding Israel.
Perhaps we have created an enfant terrible that is on the verge of expanding territory, taking chunks of Iraq (via resettlement of Jewish Kurds) as well as other neighboring nations. Sending Israeli military or mercenaries (as is documented they did in Guatelama in the 1980s) into Iran as "peace keepers" would expand territory and give access to gigantic oil reserves.
The strange predicament mentioned above is that our sources of information are not free to question publicly Israel's motivation or, in fact, to publish facts reflecting Israel's obvious planned expansionism.
How greatly the US has changed: ordinary citizens are disregarded when they pressure for Iran to be allowed to simply get on with its own business nor are common citizens here effective in asking for press or government neutrality with regard to either country.
We enjoy keeping abreast with happenings in the Arab world and the INTIFADA is a great help to accessing a broad range of topics and reliable information.
Sincerely
An American Friend of Sabeel
Moskowitz Dividing Jerusalem With His Millions
Kudos to Ms. Baker. This man Moskowitz's mindset and disregard for truth, justice, and the legitimate rights of others nauseate me.
If this were a justice-first America, he'd be prosecuted for subverting U.S. policy and current negotiations with the nazi-fascist-racist government of Netanyahu and the Bouncer Lieberman. He'd also be prosecuted and vilified for flouting international law, under which every Zionist settlement/colony on Palestinian land is ILLEGAL.
Why should Moskowitz be allowed to export American dollars to Zionist Israel to fund ILLEGALITY -- EVEN AS WE ARE (FISCALLY AND MORALLY) BANKRUPT? THIS IS NOT RIGHT! MOSKOWITZ SHOULD SPEND HIS MONEY IN AMERICA IN SUPPORT OF OUR ECONOMY!
Finally, I love America even as I hate its policies driven by Zionist Israel: I love what my country could be were it not for the Moskowitzes among us.
Robert H. Stiver
***************
When Will Americans Come to the Aid of Palestine?
With the Zionist surrounding Obama, I find it difficult to believe that the American Government will at last do the right thing for the Palestinians, freedom,justice, or peace.
It appears that Obama's "campaign of change" was a myth that the American people and a lot of the world wanted to believe. In reality it was a clever deception that continues to destroy.
Patricia Blair
***************
Hamas’s Choice: Recognition or Resistance in the Age of Obama
I wonder why it is the Palestinians that must prove their right to exist, their right of return, their right to be free? Obama displays a bias when he dwells on the past Nazi Holocaust of the Jews while ignoring the present Israeli Zionist ethical cleansing and seizure of Palestine by the same Nazi model!
A knowledgable world is weary of this excuse on the part of Israel and the US for human rights abuse. Israel must release Marwan Barghouti and the at least 11,000 Palestinians being held in their prisons.
Patricia Blair
“Who Will Hold Us Accountable?”
I read this shocking account of perfidy last evening, and I was moved to copy-and-paste it into President Obama's "Contact us" site. I prefaced the paste with this preamble; my words are harsh but, I believe, warranted. We are being manipulated by -- AND WE ENABLE -- an enterprise of criminal psychosis. That is the only way that I can describe the unrelenting, myriad-faceted Zionist drive to expunge the Holy Land of all residents except "Jews" (many of them of questionable lineage, drafted by ZioIsrael for demographic dominance). It is inhuman, it is surely not a godly action of a "chosen people," and it is...yes, steeped in a dangerous psychosis. Here's my preamble to Ms. Abou Shakra's cri de coeur:
President Obama, if you can read this searing account by Lebanese lady Natalie Abou Shakra and not feel shame, disgust, and loathing, then you are not human. This is a context in which I fully agree with Reverend Jeremiah Wright: God Damn America! God Damn Zionist Israel! God Damn Egypt! The Christians and Muslims of Palestine cry out for truth, justice, freedom, and peace. The goddamned U.S., Zionist Israeli and Egyptian governments are hellbent on not permitting any truth, justice, freedom and peace to be given to them. This day, and every day until the Palestinians are delivered from the criminal psychosis of Zionist Israel, I hate my country for its complicity in this savage, slow genocide being perpetrated before our eyes. ...
Robert H. Stiver, July 17, 2009
***************
Victory For The People of Gaza!
George Galloway after arriving in Gaza
"This is a victory for the people of Gaza. We were determined not to be denied in bringing humanitarian aid to the children of Gaza. The silence of the world is deafening as the people of Gaza suffer, but the two hundred Americans and over one million dollars worth of aide that is going through confirms our commitment to a free Palestine. Long live the people of Palestine."
-VIVA- PALESTINA- USA -
Cynthia McKinney: I Finally Made it to Gaza; No Wonder the Israelis Didn’t Want Photos Taken
Cynthia Mckinney
***************The Viva Palestina convoy, led by George Galloway, is about to leave Gaza after having been permitted to enter for a period of 24 hours after waiting 11 days in Cairo for permission to enter Gaza. That in and of itself is a major story when expanded to include the inability of Gazans to exit The Strip--even if only to enter another part of their country, the West Bank or to move about freely in the fictional "Palestinian State."
I say fictional because it continues to dwindle even while peace talks are underway. Fictional, because Palestinian elections deemed by international observers to be free and fair, don't count if the US- and Israel-approved party loses, and the winners get to sit for years in an Israeli jail. Fictional, because they use Israel's currency here, the shekel, and the international roaming on our US cell phones indicates calls are from Israel.
Gaza is beautiful. Gaza is full of life, despite Israel's Operation Cast Lead. And now, I have seen, Gaza has been bombed to smithereens. I think I've mastered my video camera enough to share some images with you. I'll post them on the sites below when I return.
In the meantime, my fellow Americans and citizens of the world, we have a lot to do to put right all the wrong things done in our name. Much love to all of you who helped me, guided me, prayed for me, to make this successful entry into Gaza happen. Viva Palestina!!Free Gaza!!--
Greta Berlin
Everyone said it couldn't be done, that we were insane, that we would never get into Gaza. But we did, and we got in four more times before Israel began to stop us. But we will go again and again. Never underestimate the power of determined people, especially those people working for justice for the Palestinians.
Greta Berlin,
an American human rights activist
and co-founder of the Free Gaza Movement
Palestine, My Bride (Poem by Shakeel Syed)
Dreams … Aspirations,
Love … Laughter,
Tears … Sorrow,
All in you, yet unrealized,
O Palestine, My Bride …
Your Silwan … screams,
Your Gaza … gagged,
Your Hebron … horrified,
Your Ramallah … wrenching,
All in you, yet in tears,
O Palestine, My Bride …
Your green gardens … brown,
Your flowing rivers … dried,
Your mighty mountains … humbled,
Your dreamy deserts … ruined,
All in you, yet you smile,
O Palestine, My Bride …
O Palestine, My Bride …
You measure yourself not in miles … but in
Checkpoints and Roadblocks,
You name your cities & towns - not by name …
but by Walls, Fences & Barriers,
You visit your Villages and Hamlets … but through
Trenches and over Boulders,
All in you – keep smiling and
All of me - keep dreaming
for your Love & Laughter,
for my Tears & Sorrow,
One Day – O Palestine
You Will Be My Bride
end
The Spirit of Humanity: Poem from Prison by Mairead Maguire
Nobel Peace Laureate Mairead Maguire
***************For Gaza and the Palestinian People
‘Spirit of humanity'
As long as
The people of Palestine
Have no liberty, no freedom
Those of us with a voice to speak
Must speak
As long as
The children of Gaza
Live in fear of Israeli
Bombs and occupation
Those of us with a voice to speak
Must speak
As long as
Six million Palestinian refugees
Are deportees around the world
Those of us with a voice to speak
Must speak
As long as
Millions of god's children
Are hungry, imprisoned, and without hope
Those of us with a voice to speak
Must speak
Because it is in speaking
We find our liberty, our freedom
And no prison bars can take away
Our peace, our love
Which is the true spirit of humanity
*****************
(for Gaza and the Palestinian people)
Mairead maguire - Nobel Peace Laureate (in Ramle - Israeli prison) 3lst june, 2009
Source: http://www.propheticimagery.com
Books to Read
If your knowledge about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is fed primarily from the mainstream media from your local newspaper, the Associated Press wire, or maybe the New York Times or the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, or FoxNews - chances are that you are sadly mislead and gravely misinformed about the Middle East crisis.
The short essays in this book will open your eyes to some basic realities that have been safely kept away from you by a timid media unwilling to show you the harsh realities daily suffered by the Palestinian people and will illustrate through some startling examples how the media has repeatedly and systematically downplayed Palestinian suffering. The book will help you gain a better understanding of the subtle ways your opinions, feelings, and perceptions of the conflict are manipulated, and hopefully put you on guard next time you open your newspaper or turn on your radio or television.
Dr. Ahmed Bouzid is founder and president of Palestine Media Watch (PMWATCH.org), and head of the Philadelphia chapter of the National Arab American Journalists Association (NAAJA.org).
The Untold Story of Israel's Deadly 1967 Assault on a U.S. Spy Ship - James Scott
Jeff Gates explores How Deception and Self-Deceit Took America to War and how this duplicity operates in plain sight and, to date, with impunity. www.criminalstate.com
Carter explores the history of this volatile conflict
The late Edward Said, author of the groundbreaking work “Orientalism”subscribe to Intifada via Rss
Electronic Intifada- Book review: Post-September 11 "Homeland Insecurity" November 26, 2009After the 11 September 2001 attacks there have been many books and articles regarding the misuse of justice and harsh treatment of Arab Americans and Muslims in the United States. Louise Cainkar's extensive research and excellent analysis is the most complete published so far. Homeland Insecurity is an ethnography which took three years to complete and […]
- Palestinian trade unions unanimously support boycott movement November 25, 2009In reaction to reports alleging that a Palestinian trade union official has stated his reservations about the Palestinian civil society campaign of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS), the full spectrum of the Palestinian trade union movement has expressed solid support for the BDS National Committee and for the global BDS campaign against Israel as an e […]
- "We will have to kill them all": Effie Eitam, thug messiah November 25, 2009Eitam, who since then has held several senior posts in the Israeli government, has recently toured the US as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's "Special Emissary" to the "Caravan for Democracy" program of the Jewish National Fund (JNF). This is a marriage made in heaven. Since Israel was founded, the JNF has organized the et […]
Power Point on Palestine- Policy Briefing 2 2 09 February 15, 2009Arms transfer to Israel during the Bush Administration.gerontios@slideshare.net(gerontios)
- Zgreaterisrael February 7, 2009This is an excellent presentation of Palestinian-Israeli Conflict. What you are about to see will surprise or shock you on events leading to the establishment of Israel. The events that created the state of Israel have been the biggest cover up in modern times. The Corporate News Media rarely presents the truth on the conflictgerontios@slideshare.net(gerontios)
Qwaider Planet- Sheep Attack!! November 27, 2009Have you noticed your Facebook account lately!! Due to the Adha Eid people shared their greetings through e-card images using sheep in many different concepts trying to spread fun and smiles before the...(read more)Sha3teely
- Sea Side – Part 20 November 27, 2009by Abufares I would never willfully lie to Amar but I could not disclose the whole truth. Surely she was dreading the time we were going to spend away from each other but was too lofty to reveal her disquiet...(read more)Mariyah's Blog
Share This Blog
Technorati
My Zimbio
My Top Posts
Facebook
Boycott Caterpiller
Due to biased, unbalanced reporting by the corporate Mainstream Media during the Gaza War.
I launched Intifada on January 11, 2009 to present the Palestinian perspective to the present Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Intifada is a fresh breath of air in the polluted biased, Zionist controlled mainstream MediaElias Farhud
