December 21st 1988: PanAm flight 103 is blown up in mid air over the southern Scottish town of Lockerbie, all 259 passengers and crew on board are killed in the bombing, with debris from the blast claiming a further 11 lives on the ground.
Framed for the terrorist attack, Libyan national, head of security for Libyan Arab Airlines and former director of the Centre for Strategic Studies in Tripoli; Abdelbaset Ali Mohammed Al-Megrahi, 49, was subjected to the kind show trial that would’ve made Mátyás Rosenfeld blush: Sentenced to life by a special court held on a NATO base in Holland on 21st January 2001. He was released from a Scottish prison on 10th August 2009 after being diagnosed with cancer, given a heroes’ welcome upon his return to Libya; Al-Megrahi spent his final three years with friends and family in Tripoli and died peacefully in his sleep in the early hours of 20th May 2012, he was 60.
A reserved and capable patriot, Abdelbaset Ali Mohammed Al-Megrahi was a victim of the times; saddled with the burden of living in the days of dishonorable peace, the fruitless era of capitulation and appeasement. Handing over Al-Megrahi to criminal regimes in the West was the first of many errors by the Libyan Jamahiriya. Former Libyan Prime Minister Shukri Ganem is on record as having said that Libya had nothing to do with the Lockerbie bombing, but reluctantly acquiesced to Western demands, handing out $2.7 billion to “…buy peace and move forward”.
The Bloody Path to Lockerbie:
1969: The Rothschild controlled, illegitimate state of Israel expresses concerns over Libya’s support for the Palestinian people in the campaign to restore their country.
1970: The Rothschild controlled U.S. regime is ordered to tackle Libya on Israel’s behalf.
1973: The U.S. navy and air force begin hostilities with operation ‘Freedom of Navigation’ defined by a series of attempted incursions in and over Libya’s airspace and territorial waters, specifically off the northern Mediterranean coast in the Gulf of Sidra.
1975: U.S. spy planes attempt to violate Libyan airspace whilst the Libyan navy manages to dissuade the U.S. navy from advancing any further. Engagements are kept down to mutual harassment, mock attacks and aggressive posturing.
1980: The U.S. regime, having suffered a humiliating strategic defeat in Iran, intensify their aggression against Libya: Rothschild sees to it that America amass an armada off the Libyan coast, and so, aircraft carriers USS Forrestal and Nimitz move in to escalate the standoff.
1981: U.S. fighter jets down two Libyan fighter planes. The pilots eject and escape unharmed. U.S. forces gradually send more naval forces and aircraft carriers to the region.
1983: The U.S. regime, having suffered a significant military defeat alongside Israel in the Lebanon, continues to ratchet up the tension against the Libyans who have yet to respond militarily to the build-up of forces on their doorstep.
1986: The U.S. fleet edges ever closer to the coast of Libya: The U.S.S. Ticonderoga carrier is flanked by armed Destroyers the U.S.S. Scott and U.S.S. Caron: 30 Destroyers and 255 U.S. fighter planes are positioned directly in front of the Libyan coastline.
U.S. fighter planes invade Libyan airspace, Libya sends in three patrol boats in a bid to hold back further incursions. The U.S. air force launches a ruthless attack against Libyan forces, killing 35 naval personnel.
Mossad terrorists bomb La Belle discothèque in Berlin, Germany killing 3 and wounding over 200 civilians. The attack is blamed on Libya as a pre-text to a U.S. invasion.
At the behest of Israel, the U.S. regime conducts a wide scale terrorist attack on Tripoli; the bombing campaign kills 50 Libyans including Colonel Gaddafi’s 3 year old daughter, Hanna.
Israeli Fingerprints All Over Lockerbie:
In the wake of the bombing, Pan Am mobilized its internal investigation agency to look into the crime, coincidently; Pan Am’s internal investigation agency was none other than ‘Interfor’, a firm run by ex-Mossad agent Yuval Aviv. Mr. Aviv’s whitewash unsurprisingly blamed swarthy, Arab looking airport staff for the security lapse; some of Aviv’s sources for the report were his former employers the Mossad and Israeli airline El Al.
In his book, ‘Gideon’s Spies’, author Gordon Thomas cities a source inside the ‘Lohamah Psichlogit’ (LAP) Mossad’s psy-ops / psychological warfare department. The source describes how Mossad agents were propagandizing against Libya “within hours of the crash”. Evidence also emerged of how suspected Mossad terrorists visited the scene of the crime and tampered with evidence at the crash site, one Mossad member even stole a suitcase belonging to U.S. agent Charles McKee. Killed in the attack, McKee was said to have links to U.S.-Israeli cointiel pro operations in the Lebanon. The Israelis, still bitter that the Americans had left them to suffer a brutal defeat in the Lebanon war at the hands of Hezbollah resistance fighters, may well have been sending a deadly threat with Lockerbie: ‘obey us, or else’.
Ex-Mossad agent Colonel Victor Ostrovsky, also agreed to testify that it was the Israelis who set up both the Berlin and Lockerbie false flag terror attacks: In 1986, Mossad sent out a signal intercept transmitted from Tripoli to Berlin, this signal was then picked up by the CIA and used to fabricate evidence to frame Libya for the Berlin discothèque bombing. The exact same Israeli intercept was used to frame Al-Megrahi for the Lockerbie attack.
The Cover Up Unravels:
Dr Hans Köchler, one of the UN observers at the trial of Al-Megrahi, declared that the proceedings were a “spectacular miscarriage of justice”.
Scotland’s Chief Law Officer during the investigation, Peter Fraser conceded in 2005 that chief witness for the prosecution; Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, was highly unreliable and expressed concerns that evidence may have been planted at the scene. It was later discovered that corrupt, Rothschild controlled U.S. plutocrats had offered “unlimited monies” for Al Megrahi’s conviction. Witness Tony Galui and his brother Paul were both paid a total of $3 million dollars for their services to the prosecution.
A fragment of printed circuit board allegedly discovered by British forensic scientist Dr Thomas Hayes had also been altered. Shabbt goy Dr Hayes, former head of British Royal Armaments Research and Defense Establishment (RARDE) was also involved in the frame up of the Maguire family for a crime they didn’t commit in 1976, The Maguire Seven were eventually freed on appeal after 14 years in prison.
Courageous campaigner Dr. Jim Swire, whose 24 year old daughter Flora was killed in the Lockerbie attack, has tirelessly fought for the truth. Piecing together evidence which exonerated Al-Megrahi and exposed the web of lies woven by a gaggle pro-Israeli sympathizers and corrupt, corporate media shills:
I first saw Baset al-Megrahi on the morning of 1st of May 2000. He was below us in the well of the specially convened trial court at (NATO) Kamp Zeist, Holland. With me were Reverend John Mosey and other friends. Close to us, to one side of the public gallery, sat his wife Aisha and his family. We were totally unprepared for the comment from another observer in the gallery:- “How could you sit so near to the filth?” he said. This was presumably naked racism, coupled to a profound a priori presumption of guilt unencumbered by the inconvenience of having to prove it. Similar hatred has festered for some, and contributed to the blinding of many ever since.
On my first actual meeting with Baset in Greenock prison, he was calm but determined to clear his name. He must have known that we had campaigned for years to have him tried under Scots law.Yet there was not a word of complaint, though his cancer, already giving him pain on sitting, was then in evidence. A devout Muslim, he had a Christmas card from the prison shop ready for me, on it he had written ‘Dr Swire and family, please pray for me and my family’. I treasure it. It resoundingly trumps the arrogance of the comment from Zeist, quoted above”.
The real perpetrators of the Lockerbie bombing remain at large, probably still in our midst planning ever more depraved and deadly atrocities for their Rothshcild overlords. But murder is a crime with no place to hide, and eventually, however long it may take; these people will be bought to book. Meanwhile, the specter of Abdelbaset Ali Mohammed Al-Megrahi haunts the Israelis like Banquo’s ghost did Macbeth, for the world is all too aware of who did what to whom and how. For even they must know that true justice will, someday, prevail.
Last week I went to see an excellent play at the National Theatre called The Collaborators by John Hodge. The play explored Josef Stalin’s unlikely admiration for dissident playwright Mikhail Bulgakov and the complex bond between art and ‘the State’. The play was a reminder that historically, even when culture has been puppeteered by an authority, unapproved and unintended meanings have a way of leaking out. Had the horror of Stalin’s Holodomor been contemporaneous today, we may well have been called upon to boycott the works of Bulgakov. This would do a great disservice, not only to the cannon of great literature, but also to the counter-revolutionary spirit evoked by Bulgakov’s work. I don’t claim that all art originating from criminal or repressive states, is loaded with subversive messages, but that art has the capacity to transcend the binary world of ‘placard politics’ (‘for’ this or ‘against’ that) and deliver the transforming might of pathos, spirit, sadness and beauty.
Reflecting on this reinforced my reluctant opposition to the cultural and academic boycott of Israel and, in particular to the call by the BDS to sabotage or ban any mode of expression delivered by state-enforced Israeli artists, musicians and thinkers. While the motives of many activists speaking out against Israeli artists and intellectuals are well intended and heart-felt, any action that seeks to abolish freedom of expression or thought is not winning any prizes for tolerance. Jews had their books burnt by Nazis & Israelis continue this dubious tradition by banning writer Gunter Grass, composer Daniel Barenboim and academic Norman Finkelstein. Surely, if we are ‘humanists’ we cannot be lured into suppressing or vandalizing art or ideas. If we do, we enter the supremacist domain of those we claim to oppose.
Furthermore, while the BDS sanctioning of goods is a logical, pragmatic tactic that I whole-heartedly support, I fail to understand the rationality of banning certain Zionist artists and not others. Last weekend Gilad Atzmon’s devoted nemesis, Tony Greenstein, took it upon himself to publish an inordinately long piece about some comments I wrote on this issue on the Facebook page of Ben White, an activist and writer who argues that Israel is essentially identical to South African Apartheid. I don’t agree with White’s prognosis. In the thread I wrote the following:-
(Culturally) ‘boycotting a nation state’ is premised on the notion that the country functions autonomously & can be ideologically quarantined. I’m not an expert on South African politics, but I certainly don’t recall the Apartheid regime enjoying the most powerful lobby group in the United States, I don’t recall the Apartheid Friends of Labor Org in the UK – nor do I recall British lawyers abandoning Universal Jurisdiction to allow SA leaders to travel freely. In short, Israel is unique in that it is maintained by Zionists across the globe on the Left & the Right. Boycotting academics & artists who happen to be born within the perimeters of Israeli sovereignty is futile. Who cares if some art-house Israeli movie gets refused from European film festivals when you’ve got Steven Spielberg’s ‘Munich’ grossing $130,358,911 worldwide?
Predictably, Ben White did not address my questions. Nor did Tony Greenstein when he recycled my words, along with an impressive gallery of photos lifted from my personal Facebook account, on his amusingly foul-mouthed blog.
Supporters of the cultural boycott state that they don’t boycott individual Israelis if those individuals are anti-Zionist (like academic Shlomo Sands). This is very kind of them. However, if it is a person’s political persuasion, not the arbitrary lottery of their Nationality, that determines whether they are spared prohibition, why is it only Israeli-born Zionists get banned? Why not picket the lectures of Zionist ‘University of London’ professor David Hirsh? Why interrupt a work of a genius like William Shakespeare (not commonly known to have been a massive Netanyahu supporter) while in cinemas across London, Sasha Baron Cohen’s Zionist propaganda film, The Dictator is delivered on a loop? I really don’t get it. Last year Wikileeks revealed that the Arab League boycotted Steven Spielberg, not for beaming Islamphobic global blockbusters like Munich onto our screens, but for donating $1 million to Israel during their 2006 war with Lebanon. This is coherent. Indeed, too many Lefties in the West refuel their self-love by waving placards without ever asking themselves why. Given the war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan committed by my democratically elected government in the UK, shouldn’t Tony Greenstein et al also boycott British Artists who receive money from the Arts Counsel of Britain? Add to this the recent revelation that BDS hero Omar Barghouti is a student in Tel Aviv University, the very institution he encourages us to ban, and the ‘movement’ begins to resemble a tangled web of hypocrisy and redundant gestures. Barghouti’s attendance at TA University doesn’t exactly make Israel resemble the Apartheid State he tells us it is. The Apartheid 1959 ‘Extension of University Education Act’ bared non-whites from entering white Universities. This has not happened to Barghouti. His presence there reinforces TA Universities’ reputation as a tolerant and multicultural institution.
Interfering with freedom of thought and expression, academic exchange and artistic liberty is a sensitive Issue. Tolerance and pluralism are core and precious values within western discourse. We should boycott Israeli products, not art, spirit and ideas. Recently I read an article from Ben white in which he admits that the ”boycott is a strategy not a principle’. This is exactly my problem with the BDS Cultural and academic boycott. It is not principled, & it lacks integrity. By refusing to have the argument you have lost the argument.
However, in order to predispose themselves to transform unity and true integration into a viable option, the rulers of these states must first abandon their tribal mentality and start thinking in broader, strategic terms.
There is no doubt that no matter how much American armaments these states buy, their ability to repulse and defeat serious predators remains at best modest. This means that member-states of the present Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) must start thinking seriously about transforming shekhdoms and fiefdonms and kingdoms into a genuine federal (not con-federal) state.
I know that the parochial tribal mentality is still prevailing in most if not all these dynastic states where the masses still have a long way in terms of reaching a respectable level of political culture.
Nonetheless, Arab states in the Gulf simply don’t have the luxury or time that would allow them to wait many more years without making concrete steps toward a federal state. This is because, the status quo is so fragile, untenable even precarious, that dealing with the matter of unity as an afterthought or worse as a dream would only spell disaster for the Gulf Arab region and beyond.
The internal sectarian dangers facing each Gulf state are real and growing. We are talking about significant groups of citizens whose loyalty lies with other non-Arab countries. Some, though not all of these people, harbor genocidal fantasies against the Sunni majority population. This is no mincing of words; it is rather a frank prognosis of facts on the ground.
I know that some religious authorities dream of the day when they would be able to take control of the Kaaba (the holiest place in Islam in Makka), which would enable them to unearth the Prophet tomb extricate the bones of Abu Bakr and Omar ibn al Khatab in order to burn them to avenge the “grievances of the House of the Prophet.
Many people may understandably relate to such matters rather sarcastically. Others might argue that these are far-fetched vagaries and mythology that can only be the product of infinitely sick minds.
Yes, this may well be the case. But this doesn’t mean that for millions of people, who blindly heed instructions from their religious clerics, these ghoulish designs are far from being far fetched; they are actually plans for the future, even manuals for action.
Unfortunately, there is a preponderance of ill-will that keeps coming from the Iranian and Shiite religious establishment, which gives rise to and justify Sunni fears and suspicions.
The genocidal Shiite drive against the Sunni majority in Syria doesn’t auger well for any amicable future involving the two communities. The recent hair-raising massacre in Houleh speaks volume as the criminal intentions of some Shiite circles and those abetting and supporting their murderousness.
Iranians, and Shiites in general, who curse Yazid, the son of Muawiya, nonstop for his alleged responsibility for the murder more 1370 years ago of Imam Husein, the Prophet’s grandson and God-like figure in Shiite Islam, are decidedly and doggedly siding with the Yazid of Damascus, whose Shabbiha or thugs are carrying out pornographic, Nazi-like atrocities against the Sunni people of Syria for daring to demand freedom and dignity from one of the most evil tyrannies under the sun.
In Bahrain, the purported Shiite majority doesn’t content itself with demanding democratic freedoms, unquestionably a rightful goal; they actually go too far in provoking and alienating the non-Shiite citizens.
We will slaughter you all once we reach power,
one of the Bahraini Shiite advocates was recently quoted as saying.
And they make no secret of their eventual goal of making Bahrain a satellite Shiite fiefdom orbiting Tehran, or perhaps Qum.
Iran has every right to be strong, even acquire nuclear weapons. Indeed, if the renegade state of Israel has a right to possess hundreds of nuclear warheads, along with their delivery systems, then Iran has likewise a perfect right to protect its interests, especially vis-à-vis Israel .
But Iran has no right to threaten and intimidate its Muslim neighbors.
The Iranian regime must stop disseminating the mendacious propaganda that those criticizing its policies are either Zionist Jews or Wahabbis as if 1300 million Sunni Muslims were quite happy about cursing the companions of the Prophet by Shiite clerics.
Indeed, why do the clerics of Iran, including the supreme guide of the revolution, Ayatullah Khamenae, issue unmistakable instructions to all Shiite clerics forbidding cursing and vilifying the companions of the prophet?
Besides, how could the Shiite clerics and leaders have the audacity to seek Islamic unity when they continue to curse and demonize the religious symbols of 90% of Muslims.
How could they demand respect and understanding when cursing the companions and wives of the Prophet continues to be an essential and conspicuous part of their religion?
Going back to our main subject, unity among Gulf Arab states, it should be more than desirable that the would-be new federal state, which could be called al-Ittihad al-Arabi” the Arab Union, should seek the incorporation of other Arab states in the region into the new entity, e. g., Jordan, Yemen, and later Egypt and Sudan.
Yes, this kind of thinking requires men of great moral and intellectual caliber. So, the question which imposes itself on all of us is whether the leaders and sheikhs and kings of the Gulf Arab states will bring themselves up to the level of the historical challenges facing them and their peoples, or succumb to their self-absorbing tendencies to maintain their families and dynasties in power for a few more years before they are terminated once and for all by predators looming on the horizons? History can be especially harsh for those who fail to learn from its lessons.
source: The Palestinian Information Center
Rechok, who was in her mid-30s, died at the scene. She set herself on fire in front of the Jonang Dzamthang monastery in Barma Township. Her body is currently in the monastery and many Tibetans have gathered for her cremation.
Rechok spent the last few days tending to her family’s animals in the mountains and then travelled into town specifically to set herself on fire.
She is the fourth lay person to self-immolate in Barma Township in protest against the Chinese occupation of Tibet.
What you can do
Ask world leaders to break the silence on Tibet
Get the latest news and all the background to the protests sweeping across Tibet on our Tibet Rising pages.
This video looks at a CNN documentary (April, 2012 with repeats) about the Iran nuclear issue, and examines the role of the mainstream media in keeping the public uninformed about the real problem-nation in the Middle East: Nuclear-armed, Apartheid Israel.
Comments with abusive or insulting language will not be approved, including accusations of Hate Speech and/or anti-Semitism.
The original CNN programme “A Nuclear Iran: The Expert Intel” was download from the location given, below, but I cannot guarantee how long it will remain available:
Interesting link: Iran finance minister: ‘Rest assured’ record oil prices over nuclear sanctions
Israel’s Sports Ministry acquired authority regarding nomination of rabbis
Heating up under the unyielding summer sun, Israel is facing a new wave of inner Jewish wars, this time in clear preparation for the October 2013 elections. Haredim and Zionists compete against each other in a chess game with no rules, where Reform and Conservative Jews are colorless pawns serving both opponents.
The lesser battle in this chess game is between Haredi factions; mainly between Sephardic and Ashkenazi. One may wonder at this; after all, aren’t their respective political parties defined on ethnic and cultural lines? The point is that the borderline between the two is not clear; for example, many people were born to mixed marriages. Leaders of both camps compete for undecided Haredi votes; more often than not by throwing dirt on the other camp. Hatred between rabbis is infamous. Many years ago, Coca Cola wanted to enter the Israeli market. It needed to be awarded a kosher certificate by the relevant religious authorities. However, the Coca Cola formula is a closely guarded secret; disclosing it to the rabbinate was inconceivable. The solution found was to divide the formula in two and give each half to a different rabbi, a modern variant on Solomon’s justice. The two rabbis involved hadn’t spoken between them in decades. Coca Cola trusted they wouldn’t join the formula’s halves. Each rabbi approved his half as kosher, and the drink was approved for the local market. This humorous accord probably wouldn’t be possible now; Haredi leaders find time to attack each other while resting from their attacks on the Zionists.
At the age of 102, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Eliashiv is Posek HaDor, the “Decider of the Generation,” the leader of the “Litaim” (as the Lithuanian Haredim stream is known in Hebrew), the contemporary Ashkenazi leading authority on Halakha, the Jewish law, a body of religious legislation parallel to Muslim Shar’ia. Ovadia Yosef is the former Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, former chief military rabbi, spiritual leader of the Shas political party, and the leading Halakhic Sephardic authority. Their last public brawl took place last year. In January 2011, Eliashiv published a letter criticizing Yosef for approving conversions performed by the Israel Defense Forces, calling all those converted by the state gentiles. “Everyone knows that there gentiles do not intend to take upon themselves a thing from the essence of the religion, neither the Sabbath, kashrut nor family purity laws. And everyone knows… That the gentiles do not intend to embrace Judaism,” Eliashiv wrote. Soon, these two mastodons of the Haredi world will need to decide if they cooperate on the issues of the Tal Law, and Reform and Conservative rabbis.
The King’s Gambit
The Haredi inner clashes are just a warming up. The real battlefield is along the religious-secular frontline. Considering Netanyahu’s expanded government, this looks odd. On May 8, 2012, Netanyahu signed an agreement with Kadima—Ariel Sharon’s party—and created a wide government that will allow him to survive politically even in the event of an Israeli attack on Iran, or the reelection of Barack Obama as president of the USA (see Shaul Mofaz Walks to Canossa). This is one of the largest governments in Israel’s history, and the first National Unity Government (an informal term referring to a government comprising the main parties) to be formed without the Labor party. The numbers are astounding. Following the 2009 elections, a coalitional government was formed in March 2009 with the Likud, Yisrael Beiteinu, Shas, the Labor Party, The Jewish Home, and from April 1, also United Torah Judaism; this was a wide coalition with 74 Members of the Knesset (out of 120) being part of it. In January 2011, following Labor’s decision to leave the government, its leader Ehud Barak formed a breakaway party, Independence, and stayed in the government, which shrank down to 66 MK’s. This was a government barely capable of survival. All this time, Kadima—the largest party in the Knesset—led the opposition. Following recent internal elections in Kadima, its leader—Tzipi Livni—was replaced by Shaul Mofaz (see Upheaval in Ariel Sharon’s Party). After early elections were publicly considered, Netanyahu and Mofaz struck a deal that brought Kadima into the coalition, with Shaul Mofaz becoming Deputy Prime Minister. This created a National Unity Government of 94 MK’s; meaning that over 78% of the Knesset supports the new government. Even if Netanyahu’s party were to leave the coalition, hisgovernment will still have a majority; such a government is almost unbeatable. In this context, the Haredi parties seem to be one of the losers of the new deal; yet reality is different.
The next elections in Israel must take place before October 23, 2013. Regardless who wins, the participation of the Haredi parties in the next coalition government is assured. Thus, Netanyahu cannot delete them from his list of problems and is attacking them in two flanks, hoping to diminish their parliamentary strength. On February 21, 2012, Israel’s Supreme Court annulled the “Tal Law.” This law kept most Haredi Jews out of the IDF (see Israeli Supreme Court Cancels Discriminatory Law). Now, a new arrangement must be found in order to keep Haredim out of the army; unless so, they will revolt. With his wide new government, Netanyahu has a substantial advantage in the negotiations on this topic; yet, all analysts agree that there is no choice for the state but to compromise with the Haredim and keep them out of the IDF.
Attempting to perform Vidui Hariga (Corroboration of Killing, a popular IDF practice), Netanyahu attacked the Haredim also from a different flank. On May 29, 2012, Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein announced to the Supreme Court Justice that the State of Israel will recognize Reform and Conservative rabbis. They will be defined as “rabbis of a non-Orthodox community,” and will receive salaries from the Culture and Sports Ministry and not from the Religious Services Ministry, as Haredi rabbis do. It is unclear if they will be requested to prove their sportive skills. They will be limited to regional councils and farming communities and forbidden in large cities. In other words, the American Jewish settlers in the West Bank will be able to continue their Reform and Conservative practices, while the rest of the Israeli population will not be aware of any changes. Yet, this is an attack of the state on the authority of Haredi rabbis.
The Latvian Gambit
The King’s Gambit described above could have been a smart one, but Netanyahu hates waking up early. Rabbi Hoffman provided to Haaretz one of the first Haredi reactions to this decision: “Reform and Conservatives have no place in the Holy Land. This is an insult and desecration of our faith. Saying they are under the Sports Ministry is even more ludicrous.” More formal reactions will take time; however, the Haredim defeated Netanyahu several months ago.
On, December 12, 2011, Netanyahu’s coalition withdrew from the Knesset what is known as the Grunis Law, named after Justice Asher Dan Grunis. This was a personal law legislated specifically to allow Mr. Grunis to become President of Israel’s Supreme Court (see Netanyahu buys Justice). Back then, Netanyahu was under pressure. In February 2012, Dorit Beinisch, the former president, was to retire, since Justices in Israel retire once they reach the age of 70. Among all candidates—the remaining 13—Asher Dan Grunis was the one favored by Netanyahu to become the next president. Grunis is a descendant of Rabbi Yitzhak Meir Alter, founder of the Gur Hassidic movement, which in Israel is closely related to the Haredim and in good terms with them. As such, he is the closest existing candidate to the right-wing, Pharisaic ideology favored by Netanyahu’s coalition. Unluckily, in July 2007, another right-wing government had sabotaged his nomination, when it promoted an amendment to the Israel Courts Law stating that a Justice with less than three years of service left would not be eligible as president. On the day the former president left office, Mr. Grunis was 41 days short of this limitation. Hence, he could not be elected. Netanyahu tried to rush the Grunis Law through the Knesset, so that his favored Justice would become president. The opposition placed 5000 objections in the way of the new law, and it was withdrawn. Following a tortuous legislative path, it was eventually approved, and on February 27, 2012, Justice Grunis was sworn in as President of Israel’s Supreme Court of Justice. Netanyahu’s thought he had acquired a sidekick; in fact, he was watching the first move of the Latvian Gambit.
The importance of this appointment became clear when under the leadership of the former president—Justice Dorit Beinisch—the court nullified the Tal Law. This law allows ultra-Orthodox Jews (Haredim and Hasidim) to choose whether or not to serve in the IDF, just days before Justice Grunis took over the role of president. For other Israelis service in the IDF is mandatory; in contrast, most Haredim decline to serve under the provisions made by the Tal Law. Expectedly, Asher Grunis opposed the nullification of the law. He declared that he doesn’t believe the court should intervene in this case. Once he became president of the court, he acquired more power to influence whatever decision would be taken in the following months. If no new law is legislated, the Haredim will have to serve in the army.
As said many times in this website; Israel is not a normal country. With no Constitution, set borders, or even well-identified citizens, many things are decided by the Supreme Court, which has the power to nullify laws. Netanyahu can play legislative-chess with the Haredim in the parliament as much as he wishes, but once the latter will get tired of this rather incompetent player, they will turn to the Supreme Court President—Asher Grunis—and demand nullification of any unfavorable law replacing the Tal Law, or of the new arrangement with the Reform and Conservative rabbis. The latter will probably be easily dismissed since the Sports Ministry is not relevant to the issue. Mr. Grunis already proved loyal to the Haredim on the issue of the Tal Law. Mr. Netanyahu did you ever consider using the Bishop’s Opening in your chess games? They say it is a simpler move for novices.
Last month, in my new role as Director of LEAP Europe, I was invited to do a talk at the SSDP conference in London. It was great to meet the key SSDP organisers, and also share a platform with Jason Reed, the co-ordinator of LEAP UK.
The student activists of SSDP are demanding that our political classes instigate a mature, fact-based discussion about the “war on drugs”.
Sorry to rehash all the well-known articles about why this “war” is such a failure on every conceivable front, but just let me reiterate three key points: prohibition will always fail (as this classic “Yes Minister” scene depicts), and the regulation and taxation of recreational drugs (in the same way as alcohol and tobacco) would be good for society and for the economy; it would decapitate organised crime and, in some cases, the funding of terrorism; and it would make the use and possible abuse of recreational drugs a health issue rather than a criminal matter.
The students get this — why can’t our politicians?
Jason and I had a warm welcome from the SSDP. They can see the value of law enforcement professionals — police, judges, lawyers, and customs and intelligence officers — using their experience to contribute to the debate. I look forward to LEAP working more closely with the SSDP.
And do drop me an email if you would like to help LEAP in Europe.
The Egyptian people are still in shock ever since the announcement of the results of the presidential elections late last week. They refuse to accept an outcome that sees Gen. Ahmad Shafiq, the last Prime Minister of deposed dictator Hosni Mubarak, having received more than 5.5 million votes, or about 24 percent of the votes cast, less than one percent behind the frontrunner and Muslim Brotherhood candidate, Dr. Muhammad Mursi.
After the dust has settled, some remarkable facts have been revealed that point towards an extremely sophisticated operation, which ensured that Shafiq would receive enough votes to go to the second round runoff (that could only have been pulled off by the Egyptian security apparatus with the support of the military and the remnants of Mubarak’s banned National Democratic Party).
This is how it could have happened.
The first significant fact is that the overall number of registered voters increased by more than 4.5 million people in less than three months. In Egypt, every person is automatically added to the registered voter rolls after reaching the age of eighteen. Egyptians cast their vote using the national identification number given to each citizen at birth. Between late November 2011 and January 2012, citizens went to the polls to elect their parliament over three different stages in nine different provinces in each stage. After each vote, the head of the elections commission declared the results starting with the total number of registered voters.
At the end of each stage the total number of registered voters was announced publicly as follows: 13,614,525 after stage one, 18,831,129 after stage two, and 14,039,300 after stage three for a total of 46,484,954. However, after the presidential elections the head of the elections commission announced this week that the total number of registered voters was 50,996,746 an incredible increase of 4,511,792 (or over 80 percent of the total votes received by Shafiq.) When the secretary of the elections commission, Judge Hatem Bagato, was asked in a press conference about this discrepancy, he lied outright, stating that the total number of registered voters last November was 50.1 million.
Secondly, in Egypt elections are held over two consecutive days. After the end of the first day the ballot boxes are left in the polling stations until the next morning. During the parliamentary elections, representatives of the different campaigns were allowed to stay in the rooms to monitor the ballot boxes in order to ensure that no vote rigging might take place. However, this time the army forced the evacuation of all precincts over the strenuous protests of the observers and did not allow a single monitor to stay in the rooms for over twelve hours. It is not inconceivable that ballots were stuffed during the night. If only two-thirds of the ballot boxes were tampered with, adding on average 500 ballots each, that would total more than 4.5 million fraudulent votes, equal to the number of the added dubious registered voters.
Moreover, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) has never intended to hand over real power to an elected civilian president. According to one European ambassador in Cairo, when he recently asked a member of SCAF how the military would react upon the election of an “Islamist” or a “civilian” belonging to the revolutionary forces the answer was an emphatic “this is not going to happen.” President Jimmy Carter was given the same answer early this year when he met with the leaders of SCAF. He mistakenly interpreted that answer as SCAF not handing over power or even holding elections rather than fielding its own candidate and then ruling from behind. In a recent interview, former intelligence chief and Mubarak’s vice president Omar Suleiman told the London-based al-Hayat newspaper that he had no doubts if an Islamist is elected president a military coup d’état would be inevitable.
Revolutionary vs. counter-revolutionary and Islamist vs. secularist
The early days of revolutionary unity have been long gone since the March 2011 referendum. Ever since that fateful day, there are clearly three major political forces within society, namely SCAF, the Islamic political parties led by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), and the mostly secular revolutionary forces including youth groups, nationalists, liberals and leftists. Whenever two of these distinct groups come together it is usually at the expense of the third party.
During the decisive revolutionary days all Egyptians were united and SCAF had to abandon Mubarak and side with the people. But during most of last year the MB backed SCAF on many occasions while the revolutionary groups were crushed and their demands ignored. When SCAF tried to impose supra-constitutional principles on all political parties to protect its interests, the MB sided with the revolutionary groups forcing SCAF to withdraw the document, retreat, and set a date for handing over power to a civilian president. When the MB tried to impose a constitutional-writing committee dominated by Islamists, SCAF sided with the secular revolutionary groups against the Islamists compelling them to change course.
But during much of last year the revolutionary groups, both Islamic and secular, failed to realize that their revolution was not finished but required them to unite against the far-reaching security state. Instead, they exhausted themselves over tactics and the future nature of the state causing intense mistrust between the parties. Meanwhile, they overlooked the fact that while the head of the regime and some corrupt elements were deposed and even criminally tried, the body was still deeply entrenched, waiting to grow another head and crush their nascent revolution.
Interpreting the elections results
Even if the presidential elections results were not tampered with, the final outcome, notwithstanding the feeling of doom, should be evaluated differently. The final results were as follows: The candidates that belonged to the pro-revolution candidates received almost two-thirds of the vote (Muhammad Mursi 25 percent, Nasserist Hamdein Sabahi 21 percent, Islamist independent Abdelmoneim Abol Fotouh 18 percent, other candidates 2 percent). On the other hand, the former regime remnants received less than one third (Shafiq 24 percent and Amr Moussa 10 percent, although not everyone who voted for the latter was necessarily against the revolution). Had the pro-revolution candidates coalesced around a single candidate they would have crushed the opposition from the first round. But the deep distrust engendered during much of last year made this outcome impossible.
Furthermore, Egyptians went to the polls three time since the fall of Mubarak. In March 2011 they overwhelmingly approved the constitutional referendum that set in motion the country’s political path. They overwhelmingly sided with the Islamic parties by voting in their favor by a margin of 77 to 23 percent. From last November to January, Egyptians again voted overwhelmingly for Islamic candidates to the parliament, garnering 75 percent of the seats. While the MB candidates received almost 11 million votes during the parliamentary elections, their presidential candidate gained only 5.7 million votes, a stunning loss of over five million votes. Such a huge drop in support in just four months is rare if not impossible in any political context. But the many missteps taken by the MB, coupled with the huge negative campaign against the Islamic parties waged by the state media, still largely controlled by Mubarak’s appointees, made it possible.
While the Islamic votes represented almost 19 million votes out of 27 million in the parliamentary elections, it represented at best 9 to 10 million votes out of 23 million in the presidential election, a dramatic loss of half of its electoral power from just a few months ago. While this loss is directly related to the parliament’s poor performance so far and the MB’s dismissive attitude towards their partners in the revolution, it did send a strong message to the group’s leadership that they needed to act quickly to repair the damage caused by their arrogant attitude towards the other revolutionary groups.
Possible scenarios for the second round of the presidential elections
Gen. Shafiq has been open about his disdain for the Islamic parties as well as the revolution that brought them to power. On more than one occasion he declared that he sees Mubarak as his role model and that once in power he would not hesitate to use the security apparatus and the army to restore order and end the protests. So his tactic has been to present himself as the last hope of secular forces to stop the encroachment of the religious state. Moussa, who came in a distant fifth in the elections garnering 2.4 million votes, has been no less forceful in calling for “the defeat of the forthcoming religious state” in a direct reference to the MB candidate. In their attempt to cast this election as secular vs. religious, they continue to use Mubarak’s era tactic by instilling fear in the society, especially among Egypt’s Christians, and deliver to Shafiq the 13 million votes that were cast in favor of Shafiq, Moussa, and Sabbahi in the first round. In a direct threat to the MB, Shafiq made it known that if need be, he would not hesitate to dissolve the parliament in order to end the dominance of the Islamic groups.
On the other hand, Mursi, the MB candidate, presents himself as the last hope for the revolution to clean up the corruption embedded in the state, dispose of the remnants of the Mubarak regime, and embark on new reforms in order to realize the objectives of the revolution. If the Egyptians who voted for the revolutionary candidates believe him, he might then receive as much as 15 million votes cast for these candidates in the first round. Barring any fraud, most of Moussa’s votes (2.4 million) would end up in Shafiq’s column, while the majority of Abol Fotouh’s votes (4.1 million) might be cast in favor of Mursi.
However, the crucial votes of the leftist nationalist Sabbahi (4.8 million) are probably up for grabs. This strongly pro-revolution candidate has so far refused to endorse Mursi and even many of his supporters have taken to the streets rejecting both candidates. Many other revolutionary groups, including Abol Fotouh’s supporters, reject Shafiq and believe that the vote was rigged. They too took to the streets. It is not known how far and intense these protests could be. If they spread and recreate the early days of the revolution then a new factor could be introduced that would force SCAF to act, either by cracking down violently on the protestors or by cancelling the elections altogether.
On the other hand, many youth and pro-revolution groups have been in intense negotiations with Mursi to offer guarantees to the supporters of the these pro-revolutionary parties. In return for their support, he would agree to several tough demands that include pledging to rule through a presidential council that would include all ideological trends, give assurances with regards to democratic rule, freedom of expression, guarantees of the rights of women and the Christian community, as well as to pledge not to run for a second term. Additionally, the MB-dominated parliament must immediately appoint a constitutional-writing committee that would decide on the major controversial parts upon reaching consensus including the civil nature of the state.
Ultimately this critical moment could potentially be a blessing in disguise, if seized upon properly by the Muslim Brotherhood and the rest of the revolutionary groups. This is the time where the revolutionary partners must join back together in order to save the Egyptian revolution. Not only are the hopes and aspirations of the people of Egypt and Arabs across the region are in jeopardy, but also of free people around the world, forever inspired by the youth of Tahrir Square.
Esam Al-Amin can be contacted at email@example.com
Press TV has conducted an interview with Kevin Barrett, author and Islamic Studies expert from Madison, to further talk over the issue
Syria slams the wording of a United Nations Security Council statement on the recent massacre of civilians in the central town of Houla. Ja’afari said the 15-nation council misinterpreted the words of the head of the UN mission in Syria, General Robert Mood. He was referring to a part in the statement that condemned the Syrian government for the artillery and tank shelling of a residential neighborhood in Houla. Ja’afari said it was an interpretation of Western states such as Germany and the UK. He added that General Mood had said it was unclear how the mass killings had taken place and that the events needed to be investigated. The Security Council released the statement after an emergency session to discuss the Houla killings. Over one-hundred people were killed and three-hundred others wounded in the town on Friday.
A new ghetto is rising, a phoenix emerging from the Holocaust ashes…
Ghetto Warsaw Uprising and Israel
There is no “Holocaust Day” in Israel; officially, the country commemorates the “Holocaust and Heroism Remembrance Day.” Outside Israel, the “heroism” part of the name is often overlooked; yet, within the electronics and cement walls surrounding the Zionist state, the “heroism” is well emphasized. There is no other option; this institutional celebration of death would be unbearably suffocating otherwise. Despite formally encompassing several events, the heroism refers mainly to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.
Warsaw Ghetto Uprising
In fact, the name “Warsaw Ghetto” is Jewish. The Nazis had created in October 1940 the “Jüdischer Wohnbezirk” or “Wohngebiet der Juden” (German), both translate as Jewish Quarter. Yet, the term “ghetto” is neither mistaken nor offensive, it was first used in Venice to describe the area where Jews were bound to live; nowadays, it is used in reference to a part of a city predominantly occupied by a particular group. The Warsaw Ghetto was the largest of all Jewish Ghettos in Nazi-occupied Europe during World War II.
The ghetto was established by the German Governor-General Hans Frank on October 16, 1940. Soon after its creation, the ghetto population reached 400,000 people, about 30% of Warsaw’s residents, while it occupied only 2.4% of the city’s territory. The ghetto was divided in two areas the “small ghetto,” inhabited by rich Jews and the “large ghetto,” where the poor lived; both were linked by a footbridge. On November 16, the ghetto was closed with a barbed wire topped wall. Armed guards overlooked it; escapees could be shot on sight. The division of the ghetto into economical classes is not casual; the internal administration of the area was performed by the “Judenrat” (Jewish Council), led by an “Ältester” (the Eldest). This administrative body was a close collaborator with the Nazis to the extent that it can be considered as an extension of the Nazi administration.
On January 18, 1943, after almost four months without forced deportations, the Germans entered the Warsaw Ghetto resolved to perform one. However, they found resistance that deteriorated into a long battle. The final struggle started on April 19, 1943, when several thousand Nazi troops entered the ghetto. Their approach was systematic, destroying all the buildings, block by block. Significant resistance ended on April 23, and the uprising officially ended on May 16, with the demolition of the Great Synagogue of Warsaw. The official Nazi report claimed more than 56,000 victims.
This struggle is the source of the “heroism” in the name of the Israeli remembrance day. Can you imagine growing up in a place where all your teachers keep saying that your grandparents—or those of the kid sitting next to you—were made into soap? Do you understand what such a kid sees whenever he uses a soap bar? Can you understand what happens when he discovers later in life that no human genes were ever found in those soap bars? Can you understand what he feels after finding that everything was an evil emotional manipulation performed by a control-freak regime interested in keeping its citizens frightened forever? In the Israeli Holocaust Day events, the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising is a counterbalance designed to give some hope—though of a very doubtful nature—in an otherwise unbearable day.
Israel’s raison d’être…
Israel acknowledges that the Holocaust is its raison d’être. It doesn’t matter what happened there, the official version led to the UN’s Partition Decision and to the incomplete independence declaration of the State of Israel. Yet, Neturei Karta’s (an ultra-orthodox Jewish group) website displays documents clarifying the responsibility of Jewish leaders of the time beyond doubt. In this context, the activities of the Judenrat were also obvious. Adam Czerniaków was the Eldest of Ghetto Warsaw; aware of his being part of the Nazi regime and in fact a traitor to his flock, he committed suicide.
The Great Game 2012
The young state chose a bizarre path. Instead of resembling a modern state, it began recreating the Warsaw Ghetto. Israel is not a country in the Western sense of the word. It is not an entity defined by territory, or even by a legal system. That’s one of the reasons why the Knesset legislated the Law of Return, which gives automatic citizenship to every Jew landing in Israel, a law that would be defined as racist elsewhere. That’s why many Israeli denizens do not get citizenship even if marrying a citizen. In 2012, Israel’s leaders—call them the Elders of Zion if you want—are closer than ever to achieving this questionable feat. Following the erection of legislative walls that created a social structure resembling the one in the Warsaw Ghetto, Israel is close to finally burying itself under ghetto-like walls; all the time while threatening the world with the Samson option, a suicidal nuclear second strike (see Six Million Submarines).
Judges 16:30 And Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. And he bowed himself with all his might; and the house fell upon the lords, and upon all the people that were therein. So the dead which he slew at his death were more than they which he slew in his life.
Ich bin ein Berliner
“Ich bin ein Berliner” (I am a Berliner) said U.S. President John F. Kennedy while visiting Berlin on June 26, 1963. Soon afterwards, the Berlin Wall became an unchallenged fact of the Cold War. Since August 13, 1961, the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) began constructing a wall that cut off West Berlin from East Germany and from East Berlin. The Berlin Wall was officially referred to as the “Anti-Fascist Protection Wall” (Antifaschistischer Schutzwall) by the East German government. Related to it was the Inner German Border fence that demarcated the border between East and West Germany; both barriers were an important part of the “Iron Curtain” that separated Western Europe and the Eastern Bloc during the Cold War.
Ich bin ein Berliner
Graffiti along the West Bank Wall
On August 22, 1989, the Berlin Wall was a solid reality; as solid as the walls constructed by Israel along its borders. It has been a solid reality since 1961. In January of the same year, Erich Honecker—East Germany’s leader—had predicted that the wall would stand for a “hundred more years.” The next day, something important happened far away from there: Hungary removed its physical border defenses with Austria. Next month more than thirteen thousand East German tourists in Hungary escaped to Austria. By itself, the event had little importance; the East German authorities would have probably found a way of blocking this little hole in the dam separating the two sides of Europe. The crossing from East Germany to Hungary via Czechoslovakia was closed, but then a similar incident happened in neighboring Czechoslovakia, which also was experiencing reforms. Eastern Europe’s reality was complex; it didn’t allow making linear assumptions. The Soviet Union was facing a deep crisis; Gorbachev was planning significant reforms. Poland and Hungary were already making reforms. Protests broke out all over East Germany in September. Initially, people were chanting “Wir wollen raus!” (“We want out!”). Afterwards, they changed to “Wir bleiben hier,” (“We’re staying here!”). On October 18 Erich Honecker, resigned. The “Peaceful Revolution” of 1989 had begun. On November 4, half a million protestors gathered at the Alexanderplatz in East Berlin. On November 9, the East German government announced that all GDR citizens could visit West Germany and West Berlin, and the wall was brought down by a plethora of euphoric people from both sides of the Wall of Evil.
A notorious fact regarding the wall is that the most offensive side in the conflict was the one to build up the wall; the East German military forces were tarnished for their violence towards civilians attempting to escape. This is similar to what is happening in Israel nowadays. Its new walls resemble an odd mixture between the Berlin Wall and the Warsaw Ghetto Wall.
A new ghetto is rising, a phoenix emerging from the Holocaust ashes…
Egypt: In late 2012, Israel will finish building a new fortified fence between the countries. The mighty fence cannot be climbed and features electronic systems allowing the regional military headquarters to find breaches in real time. The construction of the fence was decided in 2010 by Prime Minister Netanyahu. “I took the decision to close Israel’s southern border to infiltrators and terrorists. This is a strategic decision to secure Israel’s Jewish and democratic character,” he said to the Hebrew media on January that year. Again, he ignored non-Jewish citizens.
New Wall Being Built by Israel
Between Israeli Misgav Am and Lebanese Kfar Kila
Lebanon: In April 2012, Israel began replacing the fence on its border with Lebanon with a 5 to 7 meter high cement wall between the Israeli town of Metulla and the Lebanese village of Kila; where the violent border clash between the countries took place in August 2010. It follows the design of the new fence along the Egyptian border. There are plans to upgrade the entire border fence with this new contraption.
West Bank: The West Bank Barrier is still under construction and facing a myriad of legal problems since Israel is not building it on its side of the border, but on the Palestinian one. The barrier is a fence with vehicle-barrier trenches surrounded by an on average 60 meter wide exclusion area along 90% of its length, and an 8 meter tall concrete wall along the rest. 12% of the West Bank area is on the Israeli side of the barrier.
Jordan: I grew up less than a mile from the Jordan River. Yet, seldom could I enjoy its views. When doing so, it was from above—the Jordan Valley features several steps—and at points that were very difficult to access. The feeble fence blocking the access to the river wasn’t the reason for the deprivation; simply minefields filled the entire lower step of the valley.
Syria: For many years, the fence along the Syrian-Israeli border was the best in Israel. Landmines and electronics secured it. Along the years, the equipment became obsolete. Following the violent events of Naksa Day 2011 (see Casus Belli>), when many Syrian citizens were killed in Syria by IDF soldiers shooting from the occupied Golan Heights, Israel began the reinforcement of the old fence.
Well done, New Judenrat! In a few months, you will finish the creation of the Israel Ghetto, the obviouslegal successor of the Warsaw Ghetto. The Israel Ghetto will be surrounded by state-of-the-art fences. Were they designed to block entrance, or to avoid escape? Considering the massive numbers of illegitimate workers in Tel Aviv—see Terror in Tel Aviv—there is little doubt the second option is the most important one. The New Judenrat wants control of its unwilling sheep at all costs.
Please let me end this article using the English language in the manner my Thai friends would. It is not the fashion favored by people like William Shakespeare; yet, I believe it is not less clear than his wise words: Warsaw Ghetto, Israel Ghetto; same, same.
Warsaw Ghetto | Final Picture
A few days ago, in a New Statesman special Jewish edition article, Labour leader Ed Miliband explored his Jewish heritage.
As expected, Ed Miliband confessed that his father, the Marxist historian Ralph Miliband, and his mother, Marion, “raised him to appreciate various aspects of his Jewish heritage. “
But what is Jewish heritage for Ed Miliband, is it the Torah, the Ten Commandment or any particular ethical universal teaching? Not at all, Ed is not a religious Jew and is actually innocent enough to admit that his “relationship with Jewishness is complex.” In fact, it amounts to a combination of suffering mixed with Woody Allen and matzo balls.
On the one hand we follow the standard trail of Jewish anguish and trauma.
“So how can my Jewishness not be part of me?” he says. “It defines how my family was treated. It explains why we came to Britain. I would not be leader of the Labour Party without the trauma of my family history.”
But for Ed suffering is just part of the story, Ed’s Jewishness has some cultural elements in it too:
“My mum got me into Woody Allen; my dad taught me Yiddish phrases, and my grandmother cooked me chicken soup and matzo balls.”
Young Miliband is also deeply immersed in Jewish ‘rituals’. Like Zoey, Dictator Aladdeen’s Wife in Sacha Borat Cohen’s new Hasbara film, Justine, Ed’s new wife, also “broke a glass” under their wedding canopy.
I actually think that we have too many Milibands in British politics. It was revealed that David Miliband was an Israeli Hasbara author though Ed does seem to be slightly more careful than David, at least for the time being. However, I must admit that I don’t oppose all Milibands. I actually respect the eldest Miliband brother, trombone player Glenn Miliband. And you know what? I am In The Mood for a Moonlight Serenade.
Israel continues to extend its control over Arab East Jerusalem, killing all chances of reviving the peace process,
writes Khaled Amayreh
With vows to keep Jerusalem “united”, under Jewish domination, Israel this week marked the 45th anniversary of its occupation of Arab East Jerusalem.
The city is home to some of Islam and Christianity’s holiest places. However, ever since the Israeli army seized the town from Jordan during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, Israel has been carrying out an unmitigated campaign of Judaisation and de- Arabisation that many observers say has profoundly altered the face and demographic makeup of the city.
The annexation of Arab East Jerusalem by Israel is not recognised by the international community, including Israel’s guardian-ally, the United States, which refuses to transfer its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
Earlier in the week, the Israeli government, perhaps the most rightwing in Israel’s history, held a special meeting to celebrate “Jerusalem Day”. During the celebratory meeting, the government decided to allocate $91 million to confiscating more Arab land in order to build parks and other facilities for the benefit of Jewish settlers.
Israel has transferred hundreds of thousands of Jews to live in East Jerusalem, mainly at the expense of the town’s native Arab inhabitants. The bulk of the town’s resources are also utilised to benefit Jewish settlers, not the town’s inhabitants as a whole.
Nonetheless, Israel has failed achieve its goal of reducing Arabs in the city into a negligible minority. Today, Palestinians constitute between 40-42 per cent of Greater Jerusalem, which includes East and West Jerusalem as well as adjacent and contiguous suburbs and neighbourhoods, such as Abu Dis and Eizariya.
This failure frustrated successive Israeli governments, forcing them to take stringent and draconian measures aimed at besieging Arab communities in the hope of forcing more Arabs to leave the city.
Dubious Israeli figures put the population of Jerusalem, East and West, at 800,000, of which only 35 per cent are Arabs. However, these figures deliberately overlook tens of thousands of Jerusalemite Palestinians who live in the peripheries of the city or those whose residency status has been cancelled.
Several insidious tactics are used by Israel to achieve its goals, including the demolition of Arab homes, denying building permits to Arabs, confiscation of residency cards from Arab citizens and cutting off East Jerusalem from its natural economic and demographic space in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. For example, while non- Palestinian Arabs and Muslims can visit the city, Palestinians who only live a few blocks away from Al-Aqsa Mosque, Islam’s third holiest shrine, cannot even hope to be allowed to reach the shrine, even for a five-minute prayer there. Israel, nonetheless, continues to claim to provide religious freedom for adherents of all religions, a claim that looks absurd in light of objective facts.
Marking the event, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu defended continued Israeli occupation of the city. He reiterated the sound bites that successive Israeli and Zionist leaders repeat to justify the illegal Israeli seizure of the town. “Israel without Jerusalem is like a body without a heart,” he said as thousands of religious Zionist youth marched through the Arab town, sparking off clashes with local Palestinian youths.
I know there are people who say there will be peace if we only divide the city; I don’t believe so, we will continue to build Jerusalem,
Palestinians scoffed at his remarks, ridiculing his claims that Jerusalem is Israel’s heart. “He should seek his heart in Eastern Europe and Russia and Khazaria where he and the bulk of these lying Zionists came from to this Arab land as invaders,” said Yousuf Al-Khatib, a local Jerusalemite leader.
Netanyahu and ilk don’t belong here, they belong to Warsaw, Carrow, Riga, Vilnius and the Khazarr region, among other places. Look at their faces, they are Europeans, they are not Semitic, they are simply not part of this region’s anthropology. The fact that they have succeeded in seizing our land is a historical aberration that must be rectified sooner or later.
The same feelings were echoed by Ahmed Qurei, a former Palestinian Authority (PA) prime minister who lives in Jerusalem. He called on Arabs and Muslims everywhere to help the people of Jerusalem be steadfast and withstand Israel’s sinister tactics to empty the city of its Arab inhabitants.
Every day there is a confiscation drive; they simply don’t want peace. They tell the world they want peace, but everything they do here on the ground proves beyond doubt that peace is the last thing on their agenda.
The former PA official said there could be no peace and stability in the region and beyond as long as Jerusalem remained in Zionist hands.
Look, Jerusalem is not only a Palestinian issue. It is an Arab issue, a Muslim issue, and a Christian issue as well. We have to remember that hundreds of the Prophet Mohamed’s companions are buried in Jerusalem. Yes, we may not be in a position to militarily recover the city now, but things will change, and 60 or 70 years are nothing in the annals of history.
Meanwhile, the deputy head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, Kamal Al-Khatib, has warned that Israel is planning to build a massive synagogue underneath Al-Aqsa Mosque, with its main entrance located near the Buraq Wall. A few weeks ago, the Israeli government organised a tour to the site for construction contractors to inspect the area where the $20 million structure is slated to be built.
Al-Khatib said Israeli plans would effectively end remaining efforts aimed at reviving the peace process.
I think it is futile and delusional to pin any hope on peace efforts. Israel simply doesn’t want peace. Anyone doing what Israel is doing doesn’t want peace.
In recent weeks, the PA expressed a certain willingness to resume peace negotiations with Israel if the Netanyahu government agreed to suspend settlement expansion activities. The Palestinian gesture, which came as a result of financial and political pressure from donor countries, especially the US, was rejected by Israel as the Israeli government insisted on continuing settlement expansion.
The unrelenting expansion of Jewish-only colonies is widely thought to have rendered the goal of establishing a viable and territorially contiguous Palestinian state unrealistic if not impossible.
Source: Ahram Weekly
Did you ever notice how most major USA holidays celebrate genocides and holocausts? Today is Memorial Day in the USA celebrating the deaths of all the men that were drafted into or bought the military industrial complex’s war propaganda. The United States has sent troops abroad or militarily struck other countries’ territory at least 216 times since independence from Britain . Since 1945 the United States has intervened in more than 20 countries throughout the world. Since World War II, the United States actually dropped bombs on 23 countries. These include: China 1945-46, Korea 1950-53, China 1950-53, Guatemala 1954,Indonesia 1958, Cuba 1959-60, Guatemala 1960, Congo1964, Peru 1965, Laos 1964-73, Vietnam 1961-73,Cambodia 1969-70, Guatemala 1967-69, Grenada 1983,Lebanon 1984, Libya 1986, El Salvador 1980s, Nicaragua1980s, Panama 1989, Iraq 1991-1999, Sudan 1998,Afghanistan 1998, and Yugoslavia 1999. Post World War II, the United States has also assisted in over 20 different coups throughout the world, and the CIA was responsible for half a dozen assassinations of political heads of state.
The first official Thanksgiving Day celebrated the massacre of native American men, women and children during one of their religious ceremonies.
“Gathered in this place of meeting, they were attacked by mercenaries and English and Dutch. The Indians were ordered from the building and as they came forth were shot down, The rest were burned alive in the building—–The very next day the governor declared a Thanksgiving Day…..For the next 100 years, every Thanksgiving Day ordained by a Governor was in honor of the bloody victory, thanking God that the battle had been won.” (Professor Newell)
Then there is Columbus Day. He was a terrorist according to today’s definition. Las Casas, a priest traveling with Columbus tells how the Spaniards in the Caribbean “grew more conceited every day” … They “rode the backs of Indians if they were in a hurry” or were carried on hammocks by Indians running in relays. “In this case they also had Indians carry large leaves to shade them from the sun and others to fan them with goose wings.” Total control led to total cruelty. The Spaniards “thought nothing of knifing Indians by tens and twenties and of cutting slices off them to test the sharpness of their blades.” Las Casas tells how “two of these so-called Christians met two Indian boys one day, each carrying a parrot; they took the parrots and for fun beheaded the boys.” (Howard Zinn, Peoples History of the USA )
There is the Fourth of July. Those revolutionaries would be tortured at Guantanamo or water-boarded in a CIA prison in Poland or Romania today. The American revolutionaries of the 1700’s sponsored a new nation with a constitution built on “Indian removal” and genocide of an estimated 11 million natives and slavery of Africans. The figures from the 18th Century Slave Trade show approximately 5,000,000 people transported and 8,100,000 people died.
My personal favorite holiday is Labor Day. Here are some highlights from Illinois , my state of residence demonstrating how much the USA government values its laborers:
14 July 1877
A general strike halted the movement of U.S. railroads. In the following days, strike riots spread across the United States . The next week, federal troops were called out to force an end to the nationwide strike. At the ” Battle of the Viaduct” in Chicago , federal troops (recently returned from an Indian massacre) killed 30 workers and wounded over 100.
Haymarket on 11 November 1887, four anarchists were executed. All of the executed advocated armed struggle and violence as revolutionary methods, but their prosecutors found no evidence that any had actually thrown the Haymarket bomb. They died for their words, not their deeds. A quarter of a million people lined Chicago ‘s street during Parson’s funeral procession to express their outrage at this gross mis-carriage of justice.
5 July 1893
During a strike against the Pullman Palace Car Company, which had drastically reduced wages, the 1892 World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago ‘s Jackson Park was set ablaze, and seven buildings were reduced to ashes. The mobs raged on, burning and looting railroad cars and fighting police in the streets, until 10 July, when 14,000 federal and state troops finally succeeded in putting down the strike.
3 February 1930
“Chicagorillas” — labor racketeers — shot and killed contractor William Healy, with whom the Chicago Marble Setters Union had been having difficulties.
30 May 1937
Police killed 10 and wounded 30 during the “Memorial Day Massacre” at the Republic Steel plant in Chicago.
For over five hundred years whether it’s Europeans calling themselves Catholics or Puritans; Europeans calling themselves Zionists; or the democratic crusaders of the USA it’s never a good thing for indigenous populations to have invaders “settle” on the stolen land to which they say they have a divine right. . The Puritans embraced a line from Psalms 2:8, “Ask of me, and I shall give thee, the heather for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.” Their mantra of “God told me it’s mine” means the shit is hitting the fan for the people of the land.
In June 1637 John Underhill slaughtered a Pequot village in a similar manner to that described above.
The Pequot had a festival to welcome in the new harvest. At that point, the pilgrims came over and ambushed and slaughtered them. The next day the pilgrims went to church and gave thanks to God for the food and success. That’s how Thanksgiving started. Sundust Teocuauhtli Martinez
The descendents of these Europeans have a similar scam going in Syria, Libya, Iraq , Palestine , Afghanistan , Somalia , and coming soon to a war near you in Syria , Iran and the Sudan . The war hawks are down right rabid when it comes to taking over the Middle East . They also have their sites on Africa and then their plan is to go back to South America to finish the regime changed begun on that “other” September 11, in 1973 when the USA held their CIA sponsored coup against Allende in Chile. The coup in Chile is exactly what President Nixon wanted, he is quoted as saying,
It’s that son of a bitch Allende. We’re going to smash him.”
This latest terror wars scam mirrors the game run by popes and kings of the past. Papal bulls declaring all heathen lands to belong to the Catholics and royal decrees advocating the slaughter and enslavement of natives are today called executive orders and international resolutions. As soon as Bush declared “mission accomplished” in Iraq there was an executive order to “claim” the oil. As for the Zionists, their god tells them that they get to have Gaza, Jerusalem, South Lebanon, and it does not matter if it violates any man made law because their god trumps man made laws and their holocaust gets better film distribution.
The hate campaigns of past and present are slick and the propaganda program in the military and the media are one and the same: Hate the native, kill the native, and steal the land. The government media wing employs henchmen, like Edward Bernays of the past and torture loving lawyer Alan Dershowitz who manufactures the hate campaigns of today. They engineer pseudo academic programs and obsessive propaganda films intended to scare white Americans who will in turn support nuking commies or Muslims or both to kingdom come. Today’s propaganda of Trotskyites turned neo-conservatives are as factual as the Thanksgiving and Columbus myths.
President Obama says he’s all about change. Guess what story he’ll be telling today to the people of the world that the US government calls Memorial Day? I bet it won’t be the story about the massacre of Iraqi’s, Afghani’s Libyans, Pakistani’s or Syrians. It will be the continuing saga of giving thanks for government holocausts while bailing out bankers and making the military industrial complex rich for the new world order.
June Terpstra, Ph.D., activist educator and author who is on the faculty at NEIU Justice Studies, Columbia College Chicago Humanities, ED of Liberation Education Action Research Network, and VP of Alternative Education Research Institute, a prisoner re-entry research and education program.
This is an imaginary e-mail:
Sorry for the DELAY in my RESPONSE to you but it’s been a DISASTER month for me, SICK with an INFECTION, with SYMPTOMS of FOOD POISONING from a PORK dish I ate in a MEXICAN diner. Turns out the diner had had a POWER OUTAGE, their fridge went BUST and all the meat spoiled. Whether it was SALMONELLA or a VIRUS, after this there was a RECALL of all the PORK sold in the city.
My RECOVERY has been slow and I haven’t felt up to getting on the SOCIAL MEDIA lately.
I’ll keep in touch.
This kind of e-mail would send Alice to the top of of the list of potential suspects that the Department of Homeland Security (DOS) of the USA looks for when patrolling social and online media. (I am aware of that as I prepare to e-mail this article, containing this fictitious e-mail, for publication…)
The words written in capital letters are, among many others, on a list of keywords and phrases the DOS considers potential indicators of “signs of terrorist activities or threats against the US,” or which reflect
adversity to the US government.
The Manual that contains this list was released as a result of a Freedom of Information lawsuit against the DOS and the list was labeled “redacted.” It makes you wonder what else it contained in its unredacted form.
The list was posted on the internet by the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
The DOS admits only that the list contains words and terms that are too vague and it needs clarifying and improvement. Perhaps replacing it with all the entries in the unabridged Webster Dictionary could do the job. The DOS also claims that this is done not to police the internet but only to “maintain awareness.” It sounds very much like like the Wolf saying to Red Riding Hood: “Come closer so I can SEE you better.”
Many people have been shocked by the distortion, propaganda and downright lies appearing in the Western media over events in the Middle East.
But for someone living in the Middle East for 30 or 40 years, the lies are nothing new. The distorted conflicts fly furiously through the corrupt Western media.
When asked “What is the most effective military weapon the Israelis have?” The answer has to be “The control of the Western media.”
The domination of the media was decreed at the Zionist conference of 1897.
Gilad Atzmon, anti-Zionist and ex-Israeli Jew, describes it as the “Zionised Western media.”
The effect of this control dictates to the sluggish Western population which countries they may like and which they must hate.
Seventy-year-old Benjamin Freedman, an American anti-Zionist Jew, declared in a speech presented in 1961, “The Zionists rule these United States as though they were absolute monarchs of this country.”
Freedman declared that in 1916, when Britain was seriously considering a peace offered by Germans, on the basis of a status quo ante, the Zionists seized an opportunity to inform the British War Cabinet that they could still win the war.
They used the same techniques to brainwash the British War Cabinet that they have perfected in the media.
“We will guarantee to bring the United States into this war as your ally. The price you must pay is Palestine after you have won the war and defeated Germany, Austria, Hungary and Turkey.” Britain made that promise in October 1916.
Freedman revealed at that time the United States was totally pro-German; the newspapers…all the mass communication media was controlled by Jews who were pro-German.
When the Zionists saw the possibility of getting Palestine, everything changed overnight. Suddenly the Germans were no good. They were villains (shooting Red Cross nurses and cutting off babies hands. They were Huns.
An insider during this time, and a few years before, Freedman described American President Woodrow Wilson “as incompetent when it came to determining what was going on as a newborn baby.” The same tactics were used in the media. The American people were duped into joining WWI as they were in going into Iraq.
What is notably absent from the information presentation is reportage of Israeli weaknesses and atrocities.
While US networks are virulent in presenting human tragedy, be it through crime, sickness, weather or other catastrophes, there is scant if any media exposure to human suffering caused by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Neglected veterans suffer the cause of divorces, children who have lost parents or parents unable to perform normally.
The American people appear perfectly content about being ruled by the Zionists. They call it their freedom, which they say other countries envy.
Aside from the US media in general, Zionism has permeated Christian churches and the education system.
This brain-washing has gone on for 100 years and is too deeply embedded for Americans to break out and become responsible and even-handed, especially in dealing with the Middle East.
To revisit George Orwell and 1984, it may not be too late to recognize the lies, their source and how they control us:
“…and if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed-if all records told the same tale-then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’”
If the future portrayed by Orwell is avoidable, the rest of the world must break from Western media control of radio, TV, films and newspapers.
The Telegraph reported yesterday that “ministers have criticised Britain’s biggest exam board after pupils were asked to explain ‘why some people are prejudiced against Jews’ as part of a GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education).
Apparently more than 1,000 teenagers are believed to have sat the religious studies test papers, which challenged pupils to assess the reasons behind anti-Semitism.
The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance, which set the exam, rightly said that the question acknowledged that “some people hold prejudices” – they probably expected the students to examine the reasons that lead to anti Jewish feelings rather than simply justifying them.
Michael Gove, the Education Secretary who is notorious for his pro Israeli stand and his intimate relationships with the Jewish lobby, has managed to produce a particularly lame statement that should disqualify him from any holding any position related to education.
To suggest that anti-Semitism can ever be explained, rather than condemned, is insensitive and, frankly, bizarre,
Gove told The Jewish Chronicle. The ‘education’ minister should actually accept that every social phenomenon or tendency should be subject to an academic scrutiny, scientific research and critical examination. The education minister should actually encourage critical thinking and freedom of thought, however, being one of the pillars of the CFI (conservative Friends of Israel) we shouldn’t really expect a drop of integrity from Minister Gove.
Jon Benjamin, chief executive of the infamous ultra Zionist Board of Deputies of British Jews (BOD), said:
Clearly this is unacceptable and has nothing whatsoever to do with Jews or Judaism.
Benjamin and the BOD have been pouring news about the ‘rise’ of anti Semitism for years. One would wonder why are they now tormented by the attempt to question the reasoning behind the phenomenon that concerns them so much and for so long.
The exam board insisted that the question was part of a paper focusing on Judaism and the “relevant part of the syllabus covers prejudice and discrimination with reference to race, religion and the Jewish experience of persecution”.
But here comes the interesting bit. While the question is fully legitimate and deserves a thorough examination, one may wonder how would the exam board expect to mark some academically valid possible answers. For instance, how would a board’s examiner mark a young truth telling British student who may suggest that anti Jewish feelings could be realised as a direct reaction to the concerning facts that it was the Jewish Lobby led by Lord Levy that financed the Labour government that took us into an illegal War in Iraq? The student may argue that some people mistakenly identify Jews (as a collective) with the horrendous non-ethical acts of just a few Jews, this is where prejudice, plays its role. Bearing in mind it was also Jewish chronicle writers such as David Aaronovitch and Nick Cohen who were supporting this criminal act in the mainstream media, such an answer is coherent and consistent with the facts. Another honest student may suggest that with 80% of the Tory MPs (including education minister Michael Gove ) being CFI members there is a reason to believe that the British Government is under the control of a foreign power. Following the pressure of the CFI, the Tory government recently amended the British Universal Jurisdiction law just to allow Israel war criminal to visit the Kingdom. I guess that some students must be clever enough to notice that acts taken by British politicians who shamelessly attempt to appease their pro Israeli paymasters on the expense of British values and ethical consideration actually expose Jews in this country to some potential animosity. How would the exam board mark such a reasonable and critical young and innocent thinking?
It seems as if the exam board is not really prepared to tackle the issue seriously. Its representative told the Jewish Chronicle
we would expect [students to refer] to the Holocaust to illustrate prejudice based on irrational fear, ignorance and scapegoating.
In other words, the British education system admits here openly that it expects students to repeat textbook ready-made answers rather than thinking critically and thoroughly. Is it really ‘irrational’ to be tormented by the irritating idea that the vast majority of your leading party MPs are friends of a non-ethical, racist and expansionist foreign power? Is it reasonable to wonder why Jewish Chronicle Writers were over represented in some pro war advocacy? Is it really unreasonable for a young British student to ask why the American Jewish Lobby AIPAC is pushing for a war against Iran that can escalate into a nuclear conflict? Shouldn’t British students try to examine the relationships between the Jewish Lobby and the Jewish community? Shouldn’t Religious students try to examine the complex relationship between Jews, Judaism and Jewishness? Shouldn’t they look into the relationship between The Old Testament and IDF’s crimes against humanity? For sure they need do, this is actually the real meaning of education. To educate is to teach how to learn said Martin Heidegger, but in Britain 2012 Education means to teach student how to answer the appropriate kosher answer.
As it happens the exam board reacted quickly and submissively to Jewish pressure. Its representative said
the board is obviously concerned that this question may have caused offence, as this was absolutely not our intention.
I guess that the exam board who were obviously subject to some relentless pressure may now be able to form their own answer to the question. They may grasp by now what is to root cause of ‘anti Jewish prejudice’ and it has nothing to do with the ‘holocaust’, ignorance’ or ‘irrationality’. It is actually the natural reaction to abuse of our most precious intellectual right, the freedom to think.
Another uniquely banal mind Rabbi David Meyer, the executive head of Hasmonean High School, told the Telegraph that the question had “no place” in an exam.
The role of education is to remove prejudices and not to justify them,” he said.
It is pretty amusing or actually sad to find out that a Rabbi and an executive head of a Jewish school doesn’t know the difference between ‘question’ and ‘justification’. However, Rabbi Meyer, surely knows that Rabbinical and Talmudic education encourages debate and critical thinking. I wonder why Rabbi Meyer doesn’t approve the idea that Goyim teenager should also learn how to think critically and even learn how to debate?
Seemingly, the Telegraph found only one single voice of reason in the entire kingdom. Clive Lawton, formerly an A-level chief examiner for religious studies, said: “I do understand why people might react negatively to the question, but it is a legitimate one.”
If anyone including Michael Gove and the BOD want to prevent the rise of anti Jewish feelings and prejudice in general they may want to look briefly in the mirror. It is their attitude that put Jews at a growing risk. As it happens, it is always Jewish power exercised by just a very few that introduces danger to the entire Jewish community and beyond.
by ESAM AL-AMIN
Fifteen months after millions of Egyptians -led by the revolutionary youth- were united in their demand to end a corrupt and suffocating dictatorship, they were now divided as they headed to the polls in the last two days in order to elect a new president. During this transitional period the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which has ruled the country since Mubarak was deposed in February 2011, failed to uphold its promise of honoring the goals of the revolution by uprooting the corrupt elements of the former regime.
The unofficial results of the presidential elections show that the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Dr. Muhammad Mursi is headed to a runoff with Mubarak’s last Prime Minister and the anti-revolution candidate, Gen. Ahmad Shafiq. They received 24 and 23 percent of the votes, respectively. Meanwhile the two candidates supported by the revolutionary groups, Dr. Abdelmoneim Abol Fotouh and Hamdein Sabahi received 17 and 20 percent respectively, while former foreign minister Amr Moussa was a distant fifth with less than 11 percent.
So what happened and how can one understand these results?
- The revolutionaries were divided: There is no doubt that the failure of the revolutionary groups to unify their ranks and field a single candidate or a presidential ticket has cost them the chance to come out on top in this round and head for a runoff. Combined, both candidates received 37 percent, which would have guaranteed them victory in the first round had they run as president and vice president. But despite many efforts towards that end, both candidates refused to concede. Abol Fotouh argued that the country’s electorate has been favoring a candidate with an Islamist background, and thus he represented that consensus candidate who could bridge the divide between the Islamists and the secularists. Sabahi, on the other hand, argued that the country did not need another Islamist candidate after the results of the parliamentary elections, in which Islamists took 75 percent of the seats. In the last three weeks, Sabahi’s supporters mounted a ferocious campaign against Abol Fotouh, as they could only gain votes at his expense, since they could not have hoped to earn much support from the constituencies of Mursi (Muslim Brotherhood) or Shafiq (anti-revolutionaries fulool or remnants of the former regime). The tactic worked and observers believe that Sabahi may have doubled his numbers in the past few weeks, taking the lion’s share from Abol Fotouh.
- Low turnout: Despite the intense interest and the high stakes, it appears that most Egyptians are tired and simply did not show up. Some revolutionary groups have actually called for a boycott of the elections, arguing that the elections are meaningless without cleansing the state from the fulool or military control. During the parliamentary elections late last year, more than 27 million Egyptians participated. Although there are 51 million registered voters only an estimated 24 million cast their votes this time or about 47 percent as compared to 62 percent during the parliamentary elections.
- The Muslim Brotherhood went their own way: During the revolution all anti-Mubarak groups were united in their demands in ending the corrupt dictatorship. Although the MB was cautious in joining the revolution at the beginning, its subsequent participation proved crucial to the success of the revolution. But shortly thereafter, the MB broke the consensus of the revolutionary groups and went their own way, relying on their enormous ability to mobilize and organize. The tacit understanding with SCAF during most of last year – by abandoning at crucial times the demands of the revolutionary groups – created a deep mistrust between both parties. When the MB broke its pledge and decided to field a candidate, it relied primarily on its ability to mobilize its supporters. None of the revolutionary groups of Tahrir Square gave it their support. On the ground many of the MB supporters attacked Abol Fotouh, further alienating many Egyptian voters. The net effect was the demoralization of the supporters of the revolution. In the end the MB received this time less than 6 million votes as compared to more than 10 million votes during the parliamentary elections six months ago.
- The military’s candidate and the deep security state: Many analysts debated whether SCAF had its own candidate in this race. Although it declared that it did not favor a particular candidate, SCAF allowed the resources of the state to be utilized for Shafiq’s benefit. With the support of the state bureaucracy the security apparatus (which was rebuilt using its old elements and kept its connections with local officials who were never dismissed) mobilized their resources for the benefit of their preferred candidate. Many reports have surfaced in the Egyptian media that showed how army recruits, police officers, and state employees were instructed by their superiors to vote for Shafiq or, in the case of active military personnel – who are barred from voting – to have their families vote for him. The government gave all state employees Thursday off so that they could cast their vote for their preferred candidate.
In addition, since December the security and economic situation worsened deliberately by the SCAF-appointed government making ordinary Egyptians feel that the lack of security and continuing economic hardships were the direct consequences of the revolution. Even when they had voted for a new parliament, their conditions became worse not better. This allowed Shafiq to argue that once elected, he could bring security within 24 hours and that his law and order nature would bring economic prosperity.
Moreover, the elections commission, which re-instated Shafiq after he was banned from running by parliament, did not enforce its own laws regarding campaign financing. The elections commission set a ceiling of 10 million pounds from each presidential campaign. But it was clear that Shafiq’s campaign was spending hundreds of millions without any accountability. For instance, it was revealed that the cost of his billboards alone was 22 million pounds. He ran dozens of TV ads at the cost of 200,000 pounds each. The use of enormous amounts of money in politics in Egypt is not new. But this time its was taken to new heights without any accountability.
- The regrouping of the fullol: The machinery of Mubarak’s banned National Democratic Party (NDP) and corrupt businessmen was in full force once Shafiq declared his candidacy. Insiders report that the wife of former party director of organization, billionaire Ahmad Ezz (who supervised the 2010 elections fraud and is currently serving ten years for financial and political corruption with other charges pending) has paid 100 million pounds to local officials in the delta region to support Shafiq. In the heart of the delta where substantial number of poor Egyptian peasants live, local officials and mayors control every aspect of their lives. Many people have reported that these officials were paid millions to turn these peasants and their families to vote for Shafiq. In one telling moment, an Al-Jazeera correspondent asked a peasant why he voted for Shafiq and he replied that “I, along with the whole village were instructed to vote for Shafiq to bring security and prosperity.” He further said that “ I brought my family to vote for him as well.” In the five provinces in the heart of the delta, Shafiq received 2.5 million votes, or about 50 percent of his total support. By contrast, frontrunner Mursi received 1.7 million votes while Sabahi and Abol Fotouh received 1.3 million and 1 million votes, respectively. The fulool hope that by electing Shafiq he will eventually pardon all the corrupt former regime figures currently serving long sentences, including Mubarak and his sons if they are convicted. Others hope to regain the status they lost when the former regime was toppled.
- The role of the Sufis: Since the rise of the salafis during the parliamentary elections, a deep rift over theological beliefs and religious practices has taken place between the salafis and Sufi groups. There are about 12 million Egyptians who claim to belong to these Sufi traditions, especially in the Nile Delta region. The chiefs of these groups, whose livelihood depends on religious tourism, felt threatened by the rhetoric of the salafis who promised to end their “paganistic” ways. Shafiq exploited this rift and declared that he was also a Sufi and pledged to preserve their traditions. In return the Sufi chiefs declared their allegiance to him.
- The Christian vote: Although many Coptic Christians joined the revolution in toppling Mubarak, many of the Church and lay leaders have raised concerns about the rise of the Islamic groups. For many weeks, their leaders declared that they would support a “civil” candidate hinting that it would be Amr Moussa. However, last week several major figures declared that the overwhelming majority of Copts would vote for Shafiq because “he was the only one capable of stopping the rise of the Islamists” as one Christian leader declared. On Election Day, exit polls and observers confirmed that 70-80 percent of the Christian vote went to Shafiq. After the elections the acting head of the Coptic Church told al-Shrouk newspaper that he was aware of these reports and that he has suspended two senior officials in the Church pending an investigation.
So what’s next?
It is not clear how the eliminated revolutionary leaders will react to the election results. Although there is no evidence of direct frauds or vote rigging, clearly the role of the state’s authoritarian structures in influencing the outcome, as well as to the use of money to corrupt the political will of Egyptians cannot be denied. But no matter how they respond to the allegations, the elections commission will push ahead with next month’s runoff between Mursi and Shafiq. With the exception of the MB supporters, most people who support the revolution dread the day where they will be faced with the choice between the MB candidate and the fulool candidate.
But no matter what, Shafiq should never be allowed to win. In return for the support of Abol Fotouh and Sabahi supporters, the MB should offer a genuine gesture to the candidates and call for the unity of all the supporters of the revolution. But such offers must be more than empty rhetoric and need to contain meaningful acts of inclusiveness and magnanimity including offering them senior positions such as vice president or prime minister. If the MB thinks that it can win the presidency without the support of the revolutionary groups, it would be totally mistaken. Not only will the majority of Moussa’s supporters end up going to Shafiq, but now that the fulool have succeeded beyond their wildest expectations, they will double their efforts and employ more of their old tricks to guarantee a win, with the full backing of the military and state bureaucracy.
Only through regaining the determination of purpose and unity of action of those early days of the unfinished revolution can it remain alive. The MB cannot afford to botch this opportunity yet again. The alternative would likely be another revolution to replace the one that was sadly aborted.
Esam Al-Amin can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org
The British Government proves it’s hypocrisy yet again. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg tells us with a straight face that individuals accused of human rights abuses will not be allowed to enter the country to participate in the Olympics. Of course he meant Assad of Syria or his army who are guilty of killing thousands of Arabs. Surely not Israelis who after all are our friends even though they have also killed many thousands of Arabs.
The law of Universal Juristiction was recently changed precisely to allow Israeli war criminals such as Tzipi Livni into the U.K.
Watch Nick clegg being interviewed on the subject on the BBC here.
We always knew our politicians were liars and hypocrites, they just seem to be more blatent about it lately.
Some might be looking forward to the Olympic Games in London this summer – but we have 3 even bigger champions to be proud of.
CHAMPIONS OF PALESTINIAN/HUMAN RIGHTS
Baroness Jenny Tonge – Ken O’Keefe and Dr Ghada Kharmi were the three speakers at an “Israeli Apartheid Week” event at Middlesex university. Now the Middlesex Student Union have voted this event
Watch Baroness Tonge’s talk here.
Watch Ken O’Keefe’s talk here.
Watch Dr Gharda Kharmi’s talk here.
Despite much gnashing of teeth by Israel supporters such as the Jewish Chronicle no breeches of the law were found by the police investigation. However, despite the fact that no hate speech or racism laws were broken Baroness Tonge had to resign from the Liberal Democrats which illustrated perfectly the fact that our own government takes its orders from Tel Aviv.
A SPECIAL PRIZE FOR THE LOSERS
Sour Grapes for ex Muslim Raheem Kassam and his so called anti extremist website, “Student Rights” (promoters of free speech [/sarcasm off]) for alerting us to the fact that the Free Palestine Society at Middlesex Uni had won the award, because without his website I might not have known.
The number of Muslims in the U.K. is in the region of 2 million. Despite this number we are presently not united or organised enough to be a coherent voice. In my opinion this is because we do not have good leadership to mobilise us in a positive way. The lack of good leaders in the U.K. is an echo of the situation across the Muslim world where we have various self imposed dictators, British implanted Monarchies and some of the greediest cruel and most corrupt tyrants in the world.
Despite the lack of leadership Muslims are only too aware that as a community we have a responsibility to act with morality. We believe in our religious texts which tell us
(Thus We have made you [true Muslims], a Wasat (just) (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad ) be a witness over you.)
So we understand that we have a duty to defend moral values as set down in the Scriptures – the Quran and the former Scriptures The Gospels and the Bible. In the Scriptures we know from the story of Lot that the act of Sodomy is against the laws of God/Allah. Furthermore marriage in religion has always been for the purpose of procreation. Two reasons why Muslims and the people of other religions can never accept the legalisation or equality of Gay Marriage.
I wrote earlier today about the immense pressure the various lobby and special interest groups are able to put on our Peers in the House of Lords and our M.P.s in the House of Commons, read about their bullying tactics here. With so many pressure groups active in trying to ensure that Gay Marriages become a reality, what are we doing to put our views forward, in that we definitely oppose it?
One of our foremost and most active scholars in the U.K. is Sheik Haitham al Haddad who is on the Shariah Council. Sheik Haitham has written a paper on the subject of Gay Marriage asking Muslims to stand up and oppose this move. An except from his paper informs us of our duty
I do not have any reservation in confirming that it is an Islamic obligation upon each and every Muslim in the UK to carry whatever steps that may help stop this bill from going through. Everyone should not think of his impact, rather he or she should think of being questioned by Allah concerning his reaction when he saw the Divine law being violated. Let us remember that the prophet made the attempt to change anything that opposes the Divine law as a personal responsibility.
Sheik Haitham gives us a list of actions we can take in his paper which is titled The Responsibility of the Muslim Community to Oppose the Gay Marriage Bill.
I suggest that every Muslim who reads this paper by Sheik Haitham, prints it out and takes it to his Imam in the masjid or to a Muslim community leaders and asks him how his community can be mobilised into taking effective action.
It is entirely possible in many cases that Muslim parents in the U.K. were actually born elsewhere and may have no perception of what is taught in the schools here to young children. Read here an old Guardian report about books for primary school children to be used in teaching gay issues – such as the Prince who married a man and lived happily ever after. If we want to make sure that the equality of Gay Marriage is not taught to our children we need to be active in making sure that our M.P.s know that there are opposing voices in their communities.
Read here a very important letter by Hendon M.P. Matthew Offord to a constituent who wrote to him asking what his stance on Gay Marriage is. Matthew Offord’s reply explains exactly some of the consequences it may have on the teaching to our children in U.K. schools.
So far as I am aware Sheik Haitham al Haddad is the only Muslim leader to have written and spoken out on the issue of Gay Marriage – yet it is an issue that will potentially impact on the lives of all of us. I wonder why are Imams are not speaking to their congregations at Friday Prayers and at every opportunity to encourage Muslims to do what Allah s.w.t. Commanded us to do?
I despair especially of my own mosque and Muslim community in Finchley as one of the M.P.s strongly promoting Gay Marriage is Mike Freer an openly and proud gay himself. Our Mosque Committee have insisted on welcoming Mike Freer to hold his consultation clinics every few months in Finchley Mosque despite discontented voices in the community. Protests take place each time Mike Freer attends our mosque and he can only enter with the protection of police officers and the Management Committee. The Committee have come out against the views of Muslims to facilitate someone who is an open enemy to Palestinians and to Muslims by being a legislator for that which goes against the Shariah of Allah. Read my previous articles about Mike Freer and Finchley Mosque Committee here – here here and here.
Given that our mosque committee seem to be prepared appease Mike Freer to such a degree, how can we be sure they will not sucumb to pressure to be a mosque where Gay Marriages will be facilitated in the future? The kind of mosque that the west considers progressive is such as the one in America written about in a Huffingdon Post article “Progressive Muslims Launch Gay Friendly, Women Led Mosques In Attempt To Reform American Islam” Ifeel sure Finchley Mosque Committee would have more of a problem accepting the idea of Women Leaders than being Gay-Friendly.
I want to finish by reminding Muslims of our obligation to fulfill the Command of Allah s.w.t.
You are the best nation produced [as an example] for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah. If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient.
Thanks to the fact that much of the western media deliberately avoids exposing Israeli criminality, probably for fear of being accused of anti-Semitism, much of the brutal ugliness of the Jewish state remains unknown to millions of Europeans and North Americans.
This is the reason that many people in the west are still buying the big, obscene lie that Israel is a western democracy which upholds basic human rights and civil liberties. But the facts on the ground are much uglier than many people think, irrespective of how vociferous and dogged Israeli hasbara operatives get when defending and justifying Israeli misdeeds and crimes.
The truth of the matter is that institutionalized oppression, racism and terror against the native Palestinians have always constituted and continue to constitute Israel’s modus operandi.
Yes, the shipyard dogs of Israeli propaganda will concoct a thousand lies and point to a thousand red herrings to divert attention from the subject. They would invoke the holocaust, Auschwitz, Bergen Belsen, Treblinka, the Jewish origin of Christianity and many other impertinent issues in an effort to justify or more correctly distract attention from the real issue, namely the brazen evil fact of Jewish Nazism.
They would fornicate with the truth and with language in order to convince misinformed and often gullible westerners that Israel has to behave the way it does because otherwise its very survival would be in danger.
But the truth remains sufficiently plain for anyone willing to call the spade a spade. The task is certainly not easy, but not quite impossible, provided one maintains a respectable degree of rectitude and honesty.
I am saying this because the bulk of Israel’s supporters are malicious liars, e.g, know well they are supporting oppression and evil, or ignoramuses, like most Israel’s supporters on the American arena.
We don’t deny the obvious fact that there are in the region other nefarious regimes which savage, torment and murder their own people in order to remain in power. However, violence in the neighborhood, however pornographic it may be, should never make Israel look good.
After all, Israel itself remains a crime against humanity, if only because it uprooted, supplanted and is seeking the national obliteration of millions of Palestinians whose main “guilt” is their being non-members of the holy tribe.
Israel stole their land, demolished their homes, destroyed their villages, burned their fields and then expelled them to the four winds, while filling the ether with endless mendacious hasbara about Jewish democracy, morality and genius.
This week, the London-based human rights organization, Amnesty International, published its 2012 report about the status of human rights all over the world.
The group accused Israel of a long list of violations, including torture, restricting movement, limiting freedom of speech, detaining people without charge or trial for prolonged periods as well as maintaining a siege that strangles 1.6 million Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
The truth of the matter, however, is that quasi-academic reports of Israeli human rights violation, even those published by respectable human rights groups, remain quite insufficient to fully communicate the ugly reality of the Israeli state. In the final analysis, Israel is sinking in a sea of racism, fascism (it doesn’t matter if it is blunt or insidious racism), oppression and terror. One Israeli cabinet minister declared a few months ago that “we are already a fascist state.”
When I was studying at the University of Oklahoma in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Jewish circles, such as the Bnai Brith organization left no stone unturned, protesting a local Baptist minister who claimed that God didn’t hear prayers of Jews since Jews didn’t recognize Jesus as their personal lord and Savior. After an avalanche of protests, the priest apologized.
Today in Israel, there are prominent politicians and religious leaders who shamelessly claim that non-Jews are donkeys in human shape, whose lives have no sanctity and who are not entitled to human dignity. There are rabbis who issue fatwas or edicts allowing Jewish doctors to let non-Jews injured in a car accident on Saturday die of their wounds rather than give them medical treatment.
There are even rabbis who would permit Jews to murder non-Jews in order to harvest their organs if the Jews needed one.
Unfortunately, such scandalous abominations raise very few eyebrows in Israel. This happens at a time when Jewish leaders routinely, even innately, hurl the charges of hate and immorality at anyone and everyone who mentions Israeli criminality.
But so what? Israel and Jews have nothing to fear or worry about as long the US, its government, congress, and media, are in the Jewish pocket. The fact that the powerful and intimidating Jewish lobbies have succeeded in morphing most American politicians into absolutely docile political whores readily at Israel’s beck and call.
Interestingly, this had a profound insolent effect on Israel. It was rumored a few years ago that former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon sought to silence Shimon Peres, then foreign minister, telling him “don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We control the American people and the stupid Americans know it.”
Besides, the ruling elite in Israel seems to have discovered that the more extremist and the more criminal and murderous Israel becomes, the more support and backing it receives from a disgracefully pliant Washington.
It is difficult to explain this strange phenomenon from the point of view the political sociology or political psychology. The only plausible explanation is that Jewish money and power have thoroughly corrupted American political culture so much that the U.S. is sinking down the drain, definitely though no dramatically.
I have no doubt that the Palestinian people will never be able to deliver themselves from the clutches of Zio-Nazism as long as America remains thoroughly enslaved, beguiled and manipulated by world Zionism.
Zionism might soon switch alliance to China the moment China’s ascendancy to the helm of the world and America’s demotion to the status of second or third-class global power is asserted.
In any case, the peace and stability of the world depends to a large extent on the world community’s willingness and ability to check the cancerous growth and lebensraum of Zionism.
To be sure, Zionists will not raise the white flag upon the first clash with a determined world community that is serious about justice and peace; they are too powerful and too arrogant to do that.
However, a meaningful transformation in the willingness of the international community to check the Nazi-like Zionist hegemony and supremacy will definitely make Zionism think twice before pursuing it genocidal drive toward world domination.
I have no doubt that Israel will disappear one day. I don’t know when that day will come, but I feel it will come sooner than many people think. Israel is based on evil and oppression. It carries the seeds of its own destruction.
The issue of Gay Marriage is to be put to a free vote in the House of Commons, but not before Peers and M.P.s are to be forced to express their views openly on the topic in public. The following are extracts from an article in the Jewish Chronicle this week
A gay rights campaign, in which a Jewish journalist is prominent, is to force each member of the House of Lords, including the Chief Rabbi, to record their position on gay marriage.
The “Out4marriage” campaign will ask every MP and peer to record a video, send a tweet or add their name to a list of those who back equal marriage. Those who do not respond or issue no comment will be added to a public list of those who do not support the move.
So here, Out4marriage is acting as judge and jury by finding those who wish to remain silent on this very controversial issue as being not supportive of Gay Marriage and presumably they will be labelled as homophobic. So in George Bush’s terms “you are either with us or against us”.
Gilad Atzmon recently wrote a very important paper called “Post Colonial Theory Whiteness and Palestine“, the paper touches on the link between Queer theory and Jewish National Aspiration. With similar tact may I suggest to “The Lobbies” two additional questions that some may want to have answered in the same public way.
1/ Do you believe that the State of Israel has a right to exist – please make a video expressing this in clear terms, failure to do so could lead to a public “outing” as a Anti Semite.
2/ Do you believe that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust – please make a video expressing this in clear terms, failure to do so could lead to a public “outing” as a Holocaust denier.
But I digress so back to the subject of Gay Marriage.
According to the Jewish Chronicle, Rabbi Sacks is to be forced to state his opinion on Gay Marriage along with all the other Peers and M.P.s and those who do not record a video will be ruled as being against it.
This word force seems to crop up frequently when dealing with matters of interest to many Jews, but are Jewish and Gay lobbying groups really so powerful that they can force the Peers and M.P.s to do their bidding?
Well, it seems yes they are that powerful as Jack Straw has already recorded his pro Gay Marriage video here below
I have an issue with some of what he says – firstly homosexuality has long since been made legal in the U.K. so there is no issue of having to hide it, or if there is, it is a personal issue and not a legal one and secondly marriage in the religious sense has always been for the purpose of procreation, so gay marriage is not equal with heterosexual marriage and never can be.
Backing the campaign to the hilt is local Finchley and Golders Green” M.P. Mike Freer. This week Mike Freer had a twitter exchange about Hendon M.P. Matthew Offord stating that Matthew Offord is misguided in his views on Gay Marriage. Indeed Matthew Offord who does not agree with Gay Marriage has written an excellent reply to one of his constituents explaining why he doesn’t which you can read in full here, below is a very relevant extract from the letter about how Gay Marriage will be taught to young children
In regard to education, Section 403 of the Education Act 1996 places a legal requirement on schools to teach children about “the importance of marriage”. If marriage is redefined, schools will have no choice but to give children equivalent teaching on same sex marriage, even those children of a very young age, including those at primary school. So what will happen to parents who because of religious, or philosophical beliefs take their children out of lessons? It is simply inconceivable in today’s world where political correctness runs a mock in our institutions, that there would not be profound consequences for those who hold traditional views. Parents who object will be treated as bigots and outcasts, possibly excluded from being on the PTA, or from being a governor. Discriminated against and persecuted because they hold views that have been enshrined in our laws and have been the cornerstone of our society for two thousand years. And what of the teachers who object to teaching about same sex marriage. Will they face disciplinary action? How will it affect their careers? Will same sex marriage be covered under such subjects as citizenship forming part of the main curriculum taught to our children and tested through examination? These are just some of the questions that the Government has so far failed to answer.
So to conclude are, we going to be allowed to oppose Gay Marriage without being branded as bigots? How can religious leaders like Rabbi Sacks or indeed Muslim leaders respond to this campaign of bullying? Is the fallout from not supporting the Gay Marriage going to be detrimental to those whose religious or personal views do not conform to THE LOBBY.
The much-ballyhooed Facebook IPO—how surprised should we be now to hear charges that the whole thing was pretty much an insider trading scam from the get-go? As we learn here:
Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs Group Inc., JP Morgan Chase & Co. and other underwriters along with Facebook Inc. were sued by investors who claimed they were misled in the purchase of the social network firm’s stock.
The plaintiffs, who are seeking to proceed on behalf of a class of Facebook investors, said the company and the banks didn’t disclose lower revenue estimates before the share sale. The members of the proposed class have lost more than $2.5 billion since the initial public offering last week, according to a complaint filed today in Manhattan federal court.
But while small investors lost upwards of $2.5 billion, by contrast, Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg pocketed $1.1 billion from the IPO, as reported here , while Goldman Sachs didn’t fare too badly either, profiting to the tune of $235 million. Facebook went public at $38 a share, but sadly the IPO was plagued by trading errors and a 16 percent drop in the share price, and the small, so-called “retail” investors, aren’t too happy.
“The true facts at the time of the IPO were that Facebook was then experiencing a severe and pronounced reduction in revenue growth,” the plaintiffs said in the complaint.
This growth is declining because the majority of Facebook’s newer users log on through mobile devices. This is a problem because mobile applications don’t display the advertisements, and 85 percent of Facebook’s revenue reportedly comes from advertising. According to the complaint, in the hype and hoopla leading up to the IPO, the banks named in the lawsuit reduced their estimates of Facebook’s earning prospects for the year 2012, but failed to inform potential investors.
“The underwriters took down their earnings estimates dramatically during the road show and only told a select group of investors,” said Samuel Rudman, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.
Rudman made those comments on Wednesday, May 23. Now, however, comes a report that not only did the banks fail to share what should have been public information, but that Goldman and JP Morgan may have actually been making bets behind the scenes that the share prices would drop. “While both banks helped manage the IPO, they also reportedly helped hedge funds bet that the new stock would fall through a process known as shorting,” we read here. “Investors who shorted Facebook made millions as the company’s value dropped 11 percent on Monday and a further 9 percent on Tuesday before rebounding.”
So the bottom line is that the small investors suffered heavy losses on the IPO—while the inside traders made out like, well, bandits. After all we’ve heard over the past several years about criminality on Wall Street, why is it there are still gullible Americans who get suckered into pouring their hard-earned money into this “market,” an institution that today has become little more than legalized thievery (assuming it ever was anything but that). Speculation now has it that the Facebook IPO “will push more individual investors out of a stock market they already distrust after the financial crisis,” but if the marks haven’t learned by now that Wall Street is a massive Ponzi scheme, you have to wonder if they ever will. Click here to watch a cartoon animation on the Facebook IPO that someone uploaded to YouTube. “Insiders found no shortage of investors to fleece,” the video says at one point.
The question arises, of course, as to how much of a role Jewish identity and tribal loyalty play in all of this. We should keep in mind that according to the Talmud it is quite permissible for Jews to cheat or steal from Gentiles—as in Sanhedrin 57a, where it states: “When a Jew murders a gentile (Cuthean), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.” One of Israel’s chief objectives right now is regime change in Syria. Think about that as you watch the following report on “Facebook terrorism” and the role it is playing in the deadly events now playing out in Syria. The whole report is quite fascinating, but I would call your attention especially to comments at approximately 3:40 into the video: “While Facebook’s administration has previously blocked pages that openly support Bashar Assad, it has so far failed to do anything to stop the calls for the killing of his supporters.”
Now consider a report here that Goldman Sachs, following last week’s Facebook IPO, is now “ramping up investments in Web startups,” including a firm called AnchorFree. As the report states, the company “provides a so-called proxy service, which lets users connect to the Internet via remote servers so that they can’t be tracked and so residents of countries like China and Iran can skirt censors enforced by governments.” AnchorFree CEO David Gorodyansky has high praise for Goldman Sachs, calling them “very savvy product people,” and says the cash infusion will enable his company to buy servers and hire engineers to help with its push into mobile Web browsing.
So let’s see…Facebook is blocking pro-Assad pages, but allows pages that openly call for the killing of Syrians who support their government…while in the meantime, we find Goldman investing heavily in a company whose services will ultimately benefit USAID-funded dissidents in Iran. Yes, it does sound a bit like Jewish tribal loyalty.
Or perhaps we might refer to it simply as “Zuckerstein.”
All data submitted will be kept strictly private and not shared with any third parties.
by S©ott Free, & the deLiberation crew 2012
Life sentence requested by Turkish authorities
Gabi Ashkenazi | Criminal Charges against former IDF Chief of Staff
A few days ago I published Hunting down Ashkenazi, where I said: “When the day comes it would be an important testimony in the trial of Barak and Ashkenazi for war crimes by the International Court of Justice.” That sentence cost me a record number of subscribers; yet, it may soon become reality. At the beginning of May 2012, Turkey’s Justice Ministry finished its probe on the IDF’s 2010 Freedom Flotilla raid. Turkish Justice Minister Sadullah Ergin requested then information from the country’s Foreign Ministry on several IDF soldiers; fact reported by the Turkish Today’s Zaman. Yesterday, May 24, it was made public that criminal charges had been placed by Turkey against several IDF officers, demanding life sentences. Among them is former IDF Chief of Staff, General Gaby Ashkenazi.
On May 31, 2010, nine Turkish pro-Palestinian activists were killed by IDF soldiers in a confrontation with Shayetet 13 naval commandos that boarded the Mavi Marmara on international waters. The ship was bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza. Israel established the Turkel Committee to conduct an investigation; expectedly, its biased report determined that Israel’s takeover of the flotilla had been legal in terms of international law, but criticized the IDF’s preparations to the flotilla arrival as well as the operation itself.
Military Advocate General Brig. Gen. Avichai Mendelblit
The IDF position was outrageous. Military Advocate General Brig. Gen. Avichai Mendelblit addressed the Turkel Committee and claimed that the naval blockade imposed by Israel on Gaza in 2007 was according with international law, and that it was imposed due to pure military considerations and not as a part of economic warfare against Hamas. Showing disregard for the listeners intelligence, he then added: “Every step taken, be it part of classical warfare or economic warfare, aims to bring the other side to do what we want it to do.” Mr. Mendelblit, I am confused. Is there an economic warfare toward civilians or not? Mendelblit’s picture leaves no doubt: he is a Haredi Jew (notice his black kippa). As such, he studied the Talmud, meaning that he has at least a rudimentary understanding of logic. This wasn’t an unintentional mistake of a stupid man, but an attempt to mislead the public with carefully stated lies. In another part of his testimony, he said that “We have no desire to punish the civilian population” and “we won’t fire in an unguided manner into a civilian population.” For those finding these dubious, he added “no one in the IDF would think to violate international law.” Mr. Mendelblit, did you bother to read the Goldstone Report? Or at least the Beit Oranim Transcript? The last is in Hebrew, it should be easy for you. Both speak of repeated and intentional attacks on civilians by the IDF and of systematic violations of international law by the IDF. The Beit Oranim Transcript is disturbing; it describes the cold-blooded assassination of grandmothers, and mothers and their children by IDF soldiers and officers, who then spoke about it in a inner IDF event that took place in Beit Oranim; the report was published by Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Given the circumstances and its content, there is no doubt that the Turkel Committee Report is void of any value. Israel cannot investigate its own crimes.
Mavi Marmara | May 22, 2010
In early September 2011, the UN Palmer Report on the Gaza flotilla was published; it claimed that the IDF soldiers acted in self-defense, but used excessive force. Oddly enough, the self-defense of the ship crew and passengers was not properly accounted for by Mr. Palmer. In May 2012, the Turkish inquiry into the raid found that the raid was illegal. Turkish law allows for the trial of people accused of genocide or crimes against humanity even if the crimes are committed abroad; consequently, criminal charges had been placed against several of the IDF officers responsible for the mortal attack on the humanitarian convoy.
Gabi Ashkenazi | Criminal Charges against former IDF Chief of Staff
The Turkish government bases its charges—presented in a thick document of 144 pages—on the testimonies of around 600 people. 490 of them were on the attacked ship; the others are relatives of the killed. The government is asking ten life sentences for various IDF officers, including Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi, back then the IDF Chief of Staff, Major General Eliezer Merom, back then commander of the IDF’s Navy and Major General Amos Yadlin, back then Head of AMAN, the IDF Intelligence Directorate. The next step would be the issuing of international arrest orders against the accused officers. Right now, their entrance into Turkish territory will lead to their arrest and trial.
Gilad and All That Jazz is an outstanding documentary by G. Kolahi, which presents in only a little over one hour Gilad Atzmon’s evolution as a jazz musician, thinker, writer, humanist, ethicist and, frankly, phenomenon that in a relatively short time has managed not only to become known as one of the best saxophone players on the jazz scene today but also to stir passions and heated debates all over the world on the subjects of Palestinian rights and Jewish identity politics.
There are great jazz musicians and there also are well-known writers and advocates of human rights, but not in one package and not with the quality of a lightning rod that Gilad seems to have. His book “The Wandering Who?” in which he develops the concept of Jewish identity politics and dissects the inherent problems for Jews and the cultures and groups they interact and collide with has attracted praise from distinguished academics and intellectuals like Mearscheimer, Falk, Pilger, Boyle, Mezvinsky, Qumsiyeh, Bricmont and others, but also activated a vilification response of rarely seen aggressiveness on both sides of the Atlantic, including the accusation of “anti-semitism.”
The film does not quote the by now well-known accolades of the former but does give plenty of footage to the latter, which amounts to giving them enough rope to stridently hang themselves. Some of them provide a measure of comic relief, like the self-professed pro-Palestinian rights BDS zionist who says Gilad’s ideas are “dangerous for young Palestinians” and that…
We are in a position to say what criticism of Israel is kosher and how Israel should be criticized.
The interviews with his parents, his wife and his close musical collaborators, and in particular Gilad’s own poignant reminiscences of his road to ethical awareness and growth create a very moving and intimate portrait of the complex and powerful personality of the artist and thinker.
What the film does exceptionally well, by seamless juxtaposition of concert scenes and interviews (all the credit goes to R. Ribeiro for superb editing), is to to convey the sense of the organic whole that the music and the ethical quest represent for Gilad. The idea is introduced from the first images: the Palestinian children wounded and the cleaning of the saxophone. It was music that led Gilad on his road, and his obvious happiness while he plays is infectious.
The scoring of the movie — Gilad’s pieces with middle-eastern influences as well as classic Charlie Parker standbys — is jazz at its best and a delight throughout the film. He reminisces that in his adolescence, having first heard the Bird on the radio and then discovered that he was black, he thought to himself:
Black?! Maybe he is a Black Jew.
Perhaps somewhere up there the Bird hears Gilad’s sax and wonders:
A Jew?! Maybe he is a Black Jew.
One of his detractors, a British “anti-zionist zionist” (a category Gilad has pinned with precision like a bug in a display case), or maybe a zionist, they are hard to tell apart, says at one point in the film something to the effect that “he could have just been a famous jazz musician but it wasn’t enough for his ego. He wanted to be larger than life.” Indeed, why wasn’t it enough? He misses a major and paradoxical difference between Gilad and himself, namely the significance of Gilad being a sabra. Born and raised in Israel in a family of devoted zionists, raised to be a proud jewish warrior, Gilad acquired the kind of total self-confidence in his “chosenness” that admits no vacillation, no subterfuges or hypocritical manipulations. His self-confidence was such that he was not afraid to peer inside himself and to examine the culture around him with a critical eye, question the given dogma and even upend it, without fear of dissolving. “Larger than life?” I like one of the Blockheads’ description of him as a musician better, and it applies to all his other work as well, as the panicked reactions of his detractors show:
A colossus of a player, quite frightening in a way, really.
A movie to see more than once and recommend to one’s friends as well.
(First published in Swedish in May 2011)
Revolution has been brewing in the Arab world for a long time. It could have started in any number of countries, each unique with its own contradictions, incentives and history. The common denominator, however, is probably the need of a people to shape their own destiny. This is about freedom and human dignity and doing away with oppression, corruption and insensitive leaders, especially those who are puppets of Anglo-American imperialism and its Zionist masters.
The Tunisian people started the revolutionary process and the Egyptians saw it through, thus turning a page in history. However, the outcome is hardly without problems. The interests of the former despots are present in many ways and they, and their masters, are still fighting and anxious that they themselves, and not the people, are acknowledged as fathers of the revolution or at least the adoptive parents. We are witnessing merely the onset of a process, and people should prepare themselves for the worst while fighting for the best.
The ongoing economic and moral decline of western civilisation might make it possible to create a global unity of people to face up to the power elite that sees us only as cannon fodder, hard workers and obedient servants in a New World Order where nation states are weakened and conflicts between ethnic and religious groups are ever present. The future is in the hands of the people, but nothing should be taken for granted.
Everyone says it is about “Democracy” but what do we mean by that?
The fact that both the western neocolonial masters and the victims of their criminal wars and occupations now speak of democracy should give us food for thought. Democracy means the power of the people and can never be absolute but certainly approximate in various ways. In most cases some form of free electoral process is probably involved and more than one ruler or king. There are secular and religious states, there are multi-party and one-party systems, there can be voting for a personal candidate or parties/ideologies and there can be various combinations of all these aspects in a form of government.
What makes any discussion of democracy so indistinct is that people often – sometimes on purpose – do not distinguish between “the power of the people” and “form of government”. At the end of the day the extent to which the power of the people is reflected in the form of government is decided by reality. In other words, it is a practical matter, not an ideological one.
Western liberal democracy – parliamentarism – is a form of government that evolved in a young and growing industrialism with a capitalistic system of economy. The system intervenes little in the ownership of the means of production or in the power over the economy and the banks. We know today that this system needs the whole world as a market and has led to colonialism, imperialism and neocolonialism, most recently directed by the UN in Libya, and before in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq. Thus, the power of the people is very limited in liberal democracies and when it comes to matters of war and peace, it is almost non existent.
It may therefore seem odd that in countries where people have suffered under western puppets, indigenous despots or occupations, there are those who, without reservation, seem to seek some form of government similar to one that caused, or allowed this. Or do they just confuse “power of the people” with “form of government”?
What about the Islamic Theocracy?
It is difficult to envisage the future of the Iranian theocracy in the wake of the uprisings in the Arab world, but it will certainly be affected. Although the Koran or Allah lay down the law, it is people who interpret and decide on its enforcement. And people are just people, with good sides and bad; the latter usually formed by tribal mentality over thousands of years, and which first came up against more humanistic orientated ideas in modern times.
Tribal mentality is a universal phenomenon, it still exists to varying extents in nation sates, regardless of form of government. Tribal mentality and hatred towards the other belong together as do humanism and love.
Tribal mentality is usually seen as something associated with the countries in the so-called third world, but it also exists in the western world. Here it is Jews and not Gypsies who are, for the time being, at “the top of the food chain” because of their dominant role in the media and economy. The Jewish mentality, de facto a tribal mentality, hereby gains much scope in practical western policies, and has become a political ideology – Zionism (1) – its supporters widely outnumbering the number of Jews in the world, significantly because of the support it receives from Christians.
While Islam formally influences the rule of the people in, for example, Iran, Zionism has an informal influence on the rule of the people in the western world, with the exception of Sweden which is quite unique, considering the role of the state as producer of Zionist ideology through the government agency Living History Forum (FFHL (2). However, in both cases the forms of government include free general elections and neither has a dictator.
If a reliable method existed to measure the practical power of the people in Iran and the US, free from ideological and religious smoke screens, it would not be a surprise to find that the result showed up advantageous to Iran. This, however, is material for an article in itself.
Is “Democracy” the solution to the problems of the Arab world?
Having given some thought to the concept of democracy, we may now say “yes” if a form of government evolves in the Arab world that includes considerable power of the people and is sustainable, and “no” if it is simply a form of government named “liberal democracy” or something similar with very limited power of the people. The Marxist model of government, based on “democratic centralism” has also been widely, and unsuccessfully, implemented in modern time, but I shall not go into that in this context.
The peoples of the world will surely find ways to introduce new forms of government in the fight against our rulers and their rulers. There are already signs, for example, that the young people of Egypt’s revolution have achieved much more than many realise, despite the obstacles continuously blocking the way, put there by the west headed by the US and Israel.
Re Jewish mentality and Israel as an excluding state, see professor of history Slomo Sand, “The Invention of the Jewish People”, Verso 2009.
Re the Jews” influence on the western world, see professor of history Yuri Slezkine, “The Jewish Century”, Princeton University Press 2004.
Published on 23 May 2012 by Channel4News
An interesting interview where Eric Schmidt (head of Google) seems to on the one hand point to social reform and popular revolution in Europe and on the other had and new form of Google Totalitarianism.
He does make the obvious point, that austerity is doomed. Its negativity will just breed more negativity and conflict. We need to reform out systems, Media, Politics, Banks and stop the controlling influence of “Special Interest Groups”.
De•mo•cra•cy— n. a system of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
To•tal•i•tar•i•an•ism— n. a system of government that subordinates all aspects of its citizens’ lives to the authority of the state, with a single charismatic leader as the ultimate authority.
(Britannica Concise Encyclopedia)
All culture is essentially exclusionary; beliefs and practices distinguish one people from another precisely because they are different. The two systems of government defined above, for example, look as dissimilar as any two dissimilar things could possibly be. One depicts a society of self-governing free citizens; the other depicts its polar opposite.
For much of the last 100 years, these two systems of government were in a state of war (hot or cold), and out of this bi-polar world came the Western, democratic conceit that ours is the best of all possible worlds: free elections vs. rigged elections; rule of law vs. police state; civil society vs. coerced conformity; peace vs. war.
To all intents and purposes, this superiority complex dates to 1945 with the Allied defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, and effectively ended in 1989 with “victory” over the Soviet Union in the Cold War. Having defeated both communism and fascism (however defined) we wallowed in our own crapulence, the din of triumphalism drowning out any understanding of how our nemeses helped form our democratic identity. In fact, we have gone out of our way not to learn.
German fascism, for example, has been stripped of historical context and made into a cartoonish stereotype with its proponents reduced to simplistic pejorative clichés. Don’t like Iran’s president? Liken him to Hitler. Want to shut down criticism of Israeli war crimes? Play the Jew-as-victim card and invoke the Holocaust®. Don’t like having to obey a strict rule? Call the enforcer a fascist.
Yet if we do not make the effort to understand the Nazis, how do we avoid becoming like them in their absence? Hitler singled out Jews for persecution because he believed they represented a threat to the German people and were responsible for Germany’s failure in World War I. Though they were full citizens of Germany, Jews were not afforded protection to which they were entitled under the laws of the 1919 Weimar Constitution.
Democracies today single out Muslims for persecution—torture, denial of due process, warrantless searches, indefinite detention, assassination—because they are deemed to be “terrorists.” The rule of law does not apply to them, or for that matter to any citizen who protests official edicts. So how, exactly, does our persecutory police state differ from Hitler’s? How is it proper to flog the dogma that Hitler and the Nazis were evil, when we are so similar?
“Communism,” “Russia” and “Stalin” are abused even more, largely because they symbolized everything opposed to our worship of the individual and the Labour Theory of Value. We condemned the Soviet Union and other “red” countries for their centralized, planned economies that treated their people as mere economic factors of production for a soulless state-run apparatus.
We, on the other hand, are expected to accept the dogma that governmental control of the nation must be kept to an absolute minimum. Regulation, even taxation itself, is an attack on a corporation’s god-given right to maximize profit and exploit people’s labour. Raising taxes to pay for such public services as medical care, the post office, parks, broadcasting, government oversight agencies, or education is hysterically denounced as “socialist” or “communist” because redistributing wealth is something that “communists” do.
For example, when Israel’s U.S. governor Barack Obama, in one of his few acts on behalf of the American people, tried to bring in a national health-care program to ensure that all citizens had a basic level of care, he was vilified as “communist,” and had his program mocked as “Obamacare.” In our “free” world, constitutional protections against exploitative economic or political extremism are being eviscerated as governments rewrite legislation to serve the new robber barons.
In a democracy, public spending does not equate with ruthless, centralized government. Citizens are people, not serfs, and the state exists to serve their interests, not the other way around. But anti-statist prejudice in Canada and the U.S. has reached such extremes that debate over the merit of social welfare is anathematized. The quasi-religious embrace of low corporate taxes, corporate lawlessness, and social Darwinism for everyone else have reduced free citizens to economic inputs in a parasitic corporatocracy.
The public good, far from being the summum bonum of our society, has been reduced to an accidental by-product of private greed. So, exactly, how is our “democracy” any different from the repressive communist societies we once held in contempt?
We used to boast that the free press was a defining characteristic of a democracy, that the press wasn’t merely a propaganda tool of the state. When I was in university, it was common to deride the Soviet daily newspaper Pravda as typical of false, inflammatory, distorted news. Yet we now know that the New York Times deliberately larded its Middle East reporting with false, inflammatory, distorted “news”—led by Pentagon stenographer Judith Miller—and these distortions were integral to selling unprovoked military aggression to the U.S. public.
Now, outright media fraud could become law. As columnist Juan Cole reports: “Two congressmen are attempting to insert a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that would allow the Department of Defense to subject the U.S. domestic public to propaganda. The bipartisan amendment was introduced by Rep. Mac Thornberry from Texas and Rep. Adam Smith from Washington State.” Just how is our press superior to the state controlled propaganda mill of the former Soviet Union?
The contrast at the top of this essay isn’t really a contrast at all. It’s s false dichotomy. Our democracy is mutating into “democratic totalitarianism” because our victory over fascists and communists has caused our governments to take over their totalitarian roles. It is March 23, 1933. We are at war, but this time the enemy is us, and the war we will fight will be a civil one.
There is a lot of talk about Israel as the State for Jews being bad for Jews worldwide, engendering increasing anti-Israel as well as anti-Jewish sentiment, but I submit that it is primarily bad for Jewish Power, the so-called Zionist Power Configuration (ZPC), insofar as it throws an unwelcome spotlight on it. There have always been subscribers to the Protocols but until relatively recently they have been easily dismissed if not ostracized as anti-semitic conspiracy theorists, and Jews have managed to restrict the gentile book-keeping of influential Jews to counting the Jews on the Nobel Prize winners list.
Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians whose land they took over has been beyond despicable from the very beginnings of the state yet a well-organized hasbara has managed to inculcate into the minds of the Western Goyim the dichotomy: Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims = terrorists vs Israeli Jews = peace-loving, long-suffering victims. Not so anymore. Israel is no longer seen as even a “legitimate” state but a rogue nuclear power, a racist, expansionist war criminal and war monger. Of more concern, in attracting scrutiny of its successful flouting of international laws, it has led to an examination of what exactly allows it to act with complete impunity. It has exposed the lines of power that move the governments of the major world powers, like puppets on a string, to act as its enablers, indeed as its agents. The lines are now seen by more people than ever before to lead to the jewish lobbies, to the ZPC, which does not reside in Israel, but permeates the power centers of the US and the UK, and not only.
The ZPC needs Israel, the flag under which the sayanim can be rallied to march in lockstep (notwithstanding the minor kvetchings that serve to depict “plurality” and “diversity” of Jewish opinion) and to do its work in the “diaspora.” Without Israel the very useful concept of “diaspora” could not exist and the Jews might take it into their heads that they are nationals and citizens of their own countries first, foremost and last. Israel is a boon for the ZPC.
But what kind of Israel would serve the ZPC best? Definitely not the one in existence. The Palestinian “problem” has not only refused to go away in more than six decades, it has in fact grown due to Israel’s egregious actions (and its lack of action) into an impossible to hide or paper over hideous contradiction of Israel’s hasbara posters of itself. More and more people, organizations and governments worldwide are reacting to the reality staring them in the face, and concerted Jewish blackmail or cajoling is not making them back down any more. Israel is a bane to the ZPC.
These facts are recognized by the likes of big ZPC movers and shakers like Soros and by new Jewish organizations like J Street, who seek to address them, while the old guard — AIPAC, ADL and its dershes refuse to do so, not only because they think it can still be all made to go away with the old “Anti-semitism!” cudgel, but also because, on a personal level, they fear the new gang would eventually make them unclasp their paws from the high branch on which they have been perched for so long.
The ZPC needs an Israel it can both wave to the sayanim as the heart-touching symbol, the call to arms, the reproach, the unity symbol, the house that Yad Vashem built, as well as a world-wide sellable story of the success of Jews–a nation like any other (just a little bit more so…), peace-loving (say Shalom loudly and say it often), long-suffering, democratic, moral and just.
If that is what the ZPC needs then they must think that Israel is run by complete idiots. Their idiots but catastrophic idiots nonetheless. Their inability to solve the Palestine problem in the simplest and most advantageous way is proof of it.
What would happen if Israel became one state legally, not just militarily and, where it really counts, de facto, as it is now, and if the Palestinian refugees who wished to return would be allowed to do so? The Jews may become a minority in Israel. So? Is it a problem for the ZPC and indeed for jews in the US and the UK that they are a tiny minority there? Why would it be a problem in Israel? The “demographic bomb” nonsense ignores the reality of Jewish Power. Were Jews to become a minority in a putative Palestine-Israel state, their status might well emerge elevated for all practical and political purposes. They would become the minority to watch for and protect like nobody’s business. What’s not to like in this?
Attractions for the Israeli Jews in the new Formerly Known as Israel (FKI) state: they can have a Jewish Lobby there, and an ADL too! Jewish historians will be busy writing a Revised Revisionist history, recounting their ethnic cleansing in the FKI state during which, say, 600,000 Jews disappeared. They can have it all, the same, yet new and cleaned up.
Most of all, the highly inconvenient spotlight on the Jewish Power worldwide could be turned off and everything would be business as usual again quietly. Critics of the ZPC, of any and all its aspects, from the international banking to the media ownership and the political levers of power in the governments of the major powers will more easily be made into crass “anti-semites” again.
Israel could stop being a bane for the ZPC if only the ZPC “deciders” were really as smart as they are supposed to be, according to the ethnic hype. This is just a Goyische opinion but it is offered freely to zionist plagiarists.
It’s a hoot ~ JB
Gala night @ The London International Documentary Festival
World Premiere Watch trailer
Golriz Kolahi | United Kingdom | 62 mins
“Gilad and all that Jazz” is a portrait of one of the modern era’s best saxophonists; a man who has stolen hearts with the sounds of his sax and angered many with his political activities.
A gentle giant, warm, charismatic and somewhat shy, Gilad Atzmon is a complex character. Born into an Israeli, pro-Zionist family and serving briefly in the first Lebanon War of 1982, Gilad had a dramatic turnaround; he quit the army, picked up his sax and exiled himself to London, declaring himself an enemy to the Israeli state. Since then he has produced some of the modern era’s greatest Jazz albums, and collaborated with the likes of Ian Dury, Paul McCartney and Sinead O’ Connor.
In music he is a ‘feisty improviser’ as one critic put it, comparing him to the likes of Charlie Parker. In his political and philosophical ideas, he is blunt and outspoken. His ideas on Israel and “Jewishness” have upset many people. He has enemies from every camp; the left, Pro-Palestinians believe he is feeding the Zionist machine with his anti Semitic ideas and that he is damaging the cause of the Palestinians. The right, pro-Zionists are upset by his “anti-Semitic” rhetoric and his growing popularity within the Arab world.
This is the shocking story of how a 17 year old girl, Shafilea Ahmed was killed, allegedly by her parents. What could possibly drive parents to kill their own children? Shafilea’s sister said in court that she was physically abused daily and that they even with-held food for several days from her. The reason is simple – they disapproved of her becoming westernised and integrating with white people.
The alleged murder took place in Warrington in 2003. Her sister testified that she had seen her Parents threaten her with a knife and had even witnessed the murder itself. Alesha Ahmed now 23 is currently in witness protection and said in court that Shafilea had..
a secret life which she did not want her parents to know about”.
The courts heard how the parents told Shafilea that she was going to Pakistan for a family trip, but before the trip was supposed to take place, they drugged her and suffocated her.
The crime went unreported until 2010 when her sister who had witnessed the macabre event finally came forward to the police.
The really sad thing is this is not an isolated case. There have been many such ‘honour killings’ in the UK. But people for whatever reasons seem reluctant to talk about the deep racism that underpins these vile crimes.
Last year alone there were 2,823 honour attacks reported from 39 out of 52 forces, but many many more go unreported.
The perpetrators will be even considered as a hero within the community because he is the one defending the family and community’s honour and reputation.”
Freedom of Information requests have show that “honour based attacks” are up 47% in the last year.
The truth of the matter is that many Pakistani communities in the North of England have become virtual self-made ghettos, and often women are positively discouraged from integrating or even learning English, as their is no need in their tightly restrictive communities. This is not good, and Muslims urgently need to confront these issues rather than pretending they do not exist.
Historically, Israel and South Africa have been pretty close buddies, with close ties revealed between the former regime and Israel. Although one would expect the new regime to show solidarity with the Palestinians, their support to date has been pretty muted.
Recently however, the Israeli state has started flinging accusations of racism at the African National Congress government.
This follows a decision by the South African Minister for Trade and Industry that goods from the West Bank should not be labeled as ‘Made in Israel’.
“The government of South Africa recognises the state of Israel only within its 1948 borders – that area does not include territories captured by Israel in 1967.”
The inevitable tantrum from Israel followed, with Israel’s foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor accusing South Africa of racism by “singling out Israel and ignoring dozens of other areas of conflict”.
Israel’s foreign ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor accused South Africa of racism by singling out Israel and ignoring dozens of other areas of conflict.
On Sunday, the Jerusalem Post published an op-ed which confirmed that Yes, all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic!, arguing that:
All criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic because of the specific historical circumstances under which we currently live. That is to say, the historical circumstances under which Israel and the Jews exist in the world today render any non-anti-Semitic criticism of Israel impossible. And, ironically, these are circumstances that Israel’s opponents have themselves created.
So, there we have it, its our fault, and we must focus on the suffering of the oppressor whilst the oppressed are conveniently swept under the carpet.
The op-ed ends with a call that might well have been issued by Tony Greenstein and the PSC:
…however, there is at least a possible solution to the problem, should critics of Israel be willing to entertain it. It is a modest imperative: Work toward less anti-Semitism
Sadly for Israel, it is a different inevitable accusation of racism that is currently occupying the minds of South Africans.
Its all to do with a painting by artist Brent Murray, entitled the Spear of the Nation, which depicts President Zuma with his bits dangling.
Or I should say depicted, as this morning the painting was defaced, after the gallery refused to take it down, and in advance of the scheduled court hearing , when Zuma will argue that the painting should be removed because it violates his right to dignity and makes a mockery of his office. He said the portrait depicted him as a “a philanderer, a womaniser and one with no respect”.
In his court affadavit, Murray said that he never intended the artwork to cause any hurt or to harm the dignity of any person, and noted that during the apartheid years he had created satirical images which attacked abuses of power.
“For many years I have used, and continue to use, symbols with sexual connotations representative of political power and patriarchy,”
The debate focuses around the issue of freedom of expression, and whether Zuma has a right to expect respect or needs to earn it. One commentator notes that there are cultural reasons why the picture is so offensive, claiming rather dramatically that:
“The Spear” was not a spear in the heart and ego of Zuma, “The Spear” is the final spear in the future of whites in South Africa.
Oliver Tambo’s daughter Tselane has come out in support of of the painting:
So the Prez JZ has had his portrait painted and he doesn’t like it. Do the poor enjoy poverty? Do the unemployed enjoy hopelessness? Do those who can’t get housing enjoy homelessness? He must get over it. No one is having a good time. He should inspire the reverence he craves. This portrait is what he inspired. Shame neh!,
In the JP op-ed the author wrote:
A large portion of the world, West and East, has come to believe that Arabs and Muslims have earned the right to murder Jews.
Derived from this right, they have also come to believe that the destruction dismantling, and erasure of the State of Israel, and the slaughter, expulsion, and/or perpetual subjugation of its Jewish population are entirely legitimate and indeed desirable.
The claims that the end of a racist, oppressive state apparatus would lead to the killing of driving out of the Jewish population are reminiscent of the claims that white South Africans used to justify the continuation of the Apartheid regime. Yet for the majority of those who remained, life carries on much the same as it did then.
What is clear is that even Israel’s friends will not be able to turn a blind eye forever, and that the Palestinians will continue to demand justice.
Almost two decades after the African National Congress assumed power, there is still a racial tension that pops up from time to time and is never far from the surface.
Rather than insist that the world ignore the Palestinians and focus on virtually non-existent anti-semitism, it really is time for Israelis to start addressing that injustice and seeking reconciliation.
In this this debate two rabid Zionist enthusiasts (Jeremy Ben Ami and Alan Dershowitz) who openly support the existence of the ‘Jews only State’, pretend to disagree on some minor issues.
Interestingly enough, neither Ben Ami nor Dershowitz happen to be concerned with ethical or moral issues. They are largely interested in the image of Israel and its impact on American Jews.
I would really like to know how many American Jews support Israel becoming a ‘State of its citizens’. How many American Jews support the Palestinian right of return*? Is there any Jewish progressive organisation committed to universal ethical thinking?
* As far as I am aware even the IJAN (international ‘Jews only’ Anti-zionist network) seems to adhere to the concept of the Right of Return, yet fails to specify whether it supports the return of the Palestinians to their land, homes, villages and cities. Is it also possible that like left Zionists, IJAN also supports the return of Palestinian refugees to the future Palestinian State?
Islam is a religion for whom those who claim even a little Islamic knowledge have studied the classic texts under the guidance of scholars for many years. Even after years and years of studies they will claim to be just students who know only very little. Therefore the title of this piece is entirely sarcastic and merely to highlight the fact that Hasan Afzal is a complete ignoramus from an Islamic point of view who has zero authority to make any of the pronouncements that he makes. Hasan Afzal’s existence was no doubt totally mundane until as a Muslim he decided to make a career out of being an Israeli flag waver and set up the blog “British Muslims for Israel“. You can watch his speech at a Stand for Israel rally in Trafalgar Square here.
Since the “War on Islam” there have been rich pickings for some self proclaimed instant experts on Islam who unabashedly interpret our religion to suit their own (probably lucrative) agendas and who are willing to make outrageous claims about Muslims being extremists. Hasan Afzal is so unlearned about Islam that he misrepresents authentic Islamic texts to suit his self proclaimed expertise and credentials on extremism.
Having explained who Afzal is and what he definitely is not, we now need to look at just who gives him a platform to trot out his lame and inarticulate words on extremism. Who else would give him so much air space and column inches other than the Pro Israel media such as Sky News, the Jewish Chronicle and our own favourite Islamophobia award winning blog Harry’s Place. Pro Israel campaigners are always happy to accommodate and promote anyone who can bandy the words “extremist” and “Al Qaida” around and who can portray Muslims as an evil threat constantly plotting to destroy Israel. To have found a Muslim who will do their dirty work for them they may consider a bonus yet one which might yet backfire on them as when people watch Afzal on the T.V. and ask the inevitable question “are all Muslims so banal”? and if so “why were we so worried”?
Of course promoting the notion that Israel is under constant threat from bloodthirsty Muslims is what brings in the millions of hard earned American tax dollars on the pretext of defense. But not content with besieging, occupying and ethnically cleansing the citizens of Palestine, pro Israel Jews want to control Muslims in the U.K. too. Let us investigate just how they set about doing that.
“The War On Islam“
Muslim parents must be delighted when their young ones go to attend talks on religion. Religious moral guidance is sorely needed to keep our youngsters on the straight and narrow. Most teenagers in the U.K. would rather be in the pub or hanging around aimlessly on the streets, but some insightful Muslims have set up groups where Islamic guidance is given to the youth – by the youth. One such project is called “Ministry of Dawwah”. In Arabic Dawwah means to invite. I took the following from their facebook group so we can see what they stand for.
To become like those mentioned in this beautiful ayah: In truth, they were YOUTHS who believed in their Lord and We increased them in guidance. We gave strength to their hearts. Behold, they stood up and said: ‘Our Lord is the Lord of the heavens and of the earth: never shall we call upon any god other than Him, if we did, we should indeed have uttered an enormity.’ [Al- Quran 18: 13]
Ministry of Dawah is run by youth in the central London area, providing activities and Islamic circles for youth, dealing with our issues, on the level, in a way we can understand. We hope to engage, entertain and excite InshaAllah!
MOD is a non partisan organisation based on Islam, which seeks to provide a platform that enables Muslims and non Muslims the chance to discuss contemporary issues that are facing the youth and their vision. MOD hopes to achieve this in a way that they can understand and relate to in their daily lives. MOD aims to present islamic issues whether they are political or spiritual so it’s members can discuss or debate them in an islamic manner abiding by ettiquettes.
A beautiful project ! Clearly a youth organisation aiming to reach out to the youth both Muslim and non Muslim, in a way that youth can relate to. The group has been meeting for over two years in a building run by a King’s Cross Neighbourhood Association. All Ministry of Dawwah talks are available to listen to on their youtube channel and on their facebook page “Ministry of Dawwah”. Nothing hidden at all, it is all out in the public domain because they have nothing to hide.
Now we read in the Jewish Chronicle that Afzal managed to close the venue down that has hosted Ministry of Dawwah for over two years. I notice that the Ministry of Dawwah state that some of their discussions will be political and exactly which political issue is in the heart of every Muslim on the planet other than The issue of the occupation of Palestine. But is the subject of the illegal occupation of Palestine a subject which is about to become illegal for discussion in the U.K.? We have seen in the past how both pro Zionists and proclaimed anti Zionist groups work in packs to harass and intimidate venue providers by bombarding them with defamatory e.mails and phone calls claiming that they are hosting anti Semites or extremists. Only this week deLiberation published a campaign of defamation and harassment of the organisers and speakers at the One State conference in Germany read about it here, this is but one example of what is an unrelenting and ongoing battle to control the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the West.
Here is an extract from Grand Mufti Afzal’s fatwa
Hasan Afzal, director of the anti-extremism group Stand for Peace, contacted the council earlier this month to warn that the Ministry of Dawah was using the centre to “whitewash the terrorist convictions of a number of Islamists”.
I think it is only fair to point out from the start here that Stand for Peace far from being a group comprises at most two members. I can only imagine Afzal suffered some emotionally traumatic life changing experience at University which led to him dropping out of his studies and on to a dangerous trajectory and into the arms of the Zionists. Hasan Afzal is now to the Pro Israel Jews what Abdul Sallam is to the E.D.L. (English Defence League).
So let us examine these outrageously damning and downright scary accusations that Afzal and the Jewish Chronicle make about Ministry of Dawwah with my comments in italics.
- promotion of extreme Islamist organisations such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, and support for bin Laden and other al-Qaeda leaders . . . Many Muslims support much of what Bin Laden said, whilst not supporting the killing of innocent civilians. Hizb ut Tahrir is an international organisation which is running openly and legally in the U.K. so what is wrong with showing support for it?
- Events held by the group at the venue have included a “Maidens of Paradise” discussion about women, and “Deeds after Death” in which participants were told: “Did you know you can still get rewards even after your soul has departed from your body?” . . . The Maidens of Paradise are the beautiful houries in heaven the place that every Muslim man and women strives to achieve. No angels sitting on fluffy clouds playing harps of uncertain gender for Muslim men! What can Muslim women hope for in Paradise? The answer is anything we want! So hard to see what is offensive about this talk but it is there for all listen to if you want to follow the link. Deeds after Death is Islamic teaching that whilst we can strive to earn good deeds in this life after we die there are certain deeds that keep on giving us reward this is called sadaqah jariah, like building a mosque or a legacy of Islamic scholarship etc an alms giving which by the merciful nature of Allah keeps on earning rewards even after death. Again I posted the link. There is nothing whatsoever extreme about either talk merely very mainstream talks based on widely used Islamic texts.
- A “Free Palestine” discussion asked participants to consider how “the Zionist Israeli state [is] using illegal weaponry such as white phosphorous to kill and murder innocent human beings including children”. . . No one has a problem with that statement including the Goldstone report. It is indeed illegal to use white phosporus in heavily populated areas. I think that Jon Snow says it so much better than I can so here the video “Inside the mind of Mark Regev” always worth revisiting!
- At another lecture the speaker tells the audience: “You are in a battle of ideas, a battle for hearts and minds, and it’s a battle that’s clearly about the West versus Islam. . . For sure – the War on Islam is now official
- One lecturer claimed Israeli snipers were used to kill Palestinian children in Gaza and talked about his hope that Muslims would be able to pray at the Al-Aqsa Mosque with “no Israel, no occupation at all . . .Nothing unfactual about that children sitting in classrooms being killed as it is well documented and on the second point one and a half billion Muslims and the United Nations would agree that Israel should get out of occupied East Jerusalem.
- There is a further discussion on how Israel will be “wiped off the earth” by Allah . . . Right so they are saying Allah s.w.t. will do that so hardly a battle cry for Muslims to take up jihad then.
I could go on but as we can clearly see the claims of Hasan Afzal are very weak and flimsy they could easily be put into context by your average practising Muslim aged about 10. So does anybody really think that Pro Israel Jews or a lone not very bright or articulate Muslim for Israel should control who speaks about Islam to the youth? We know that there is a war against Islam where Zio/NeoCons want to take Muslims away from the classic teachings of Islam. We have to be strong and stand up to these bullies who seek to confuse and liberalise Muslims. We have to provide more Islamic teachings for the youth to try to counter the effects of the West’s liberal values which bring with it the erosion of morals and family values.
No man and least of all Hasan Afzal can change the dictates or ideals set forth by Allah s.w.t.
يُرِيدُونَ لِيُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَاللَّهُ مُتِمُّ نُورِهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ
They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, although the disbelievers dislike it.
Israeli and Jewish hypocrisy is so brazen that it probably has no match under the sun. Jewish and Zionist circles never stop accusing other countries of harboring “hate” against Jews.
Jewish propaganda arms, such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Simon Wiesenthal Center as well as the Israeli foreign ministry recently criticized several countries, including Greece, for allowing nationalist parties to function.
We are told that the appearance of these parties in Europe should sound an alarm note because certain red lines are being crossed.
It is always good and auspicious to stand against and be vigilant about fascist and extreme nationalist parties which advocate xenophobia, bigotry and racism, such as Islamophbia and anti-Semitism.
But this is not the point here. The point is that Israel is inherently and absolutely unfit to lecture other countries and other peoples on the evils of racism as Israel itself is probably the ugliest and most brazen of embodiment of racism on earth.
For example, Israel and Jewish circles protest rather vociferously, usually with a great degree of sanctimony, the alleged hatred existing in Palestinian and other Arab textbooks when every Jewish school child is taught that Jews are the master race and that non-Jews are either lesser or sub-humans.
Just try to thoroughly examine the text-books used in hundreds of Talmudic schools across Israel and the occupied territories and you will see strange wonders. You will see text-books teaching that the Almighty created the entire universe solely for the sake of the Jew. You will see books teaching that the Almighty created all the nations “Goyem” (people like you and me) solely in order to serve the master race or Chosen People. According to some Talmudic texts, the lives of non-Jews have no sanctity.
Indeed, according to some rabbis affiliated with the Nazi-like Chabad sect, a Jew may murder a non-Jew, without any compunction, in order to extricate an organ from his or her body if the Jew needs one.
I really thought that this was a far-fetched canard until I ascertained its veracity.
Now, how Jews and Zionists could have the Chutzpah to criticize others of harboring “hate” toward Jews when Jews don’t even recognize those people’s very humanity? This is undoubtedly an uncomfortable question for the Israeli hasbara apparatus, which refuses to be honest in tackling such questions.
For example, when Zionist propagandists, such as Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson and Elie Wiesel are confronted with irrefutable facts pertaining to brash Jewish racism and there is no point denying the obvious, they try to prevaricate or evade the issue. Some, like Wiesel, have the audacity to claim that the rest of mankind has no right to criticize Jews even when Jews indulge in war crimes against humanity.
Unfortunately, many westerners, who are either scared to death by the Jewish Golem or scandalously brainwashed by a pliant media that is at Zionism’s beck and call, readily listen to and even dignify these morbid Zionist vagaries which go beyond the pale. After all, it would be foolish to challenge the self-righteousness of people like Wiesel especially when his Jewish supremacist sickness is accorded solemn and ample media attention from Sydney to California .
Another point. When any writer or intellectual thoughtfully and sincerely criticizes the Talmudic edicts that keep resurfacing in Israel, edicts which dehumanize and demonize non-Jews, or question Israeli regional hegemony and bellicosity, as did the German poet Guenter Grass recently, we see the shipyard dogs of Zionism fire a round after round of the anti-Semitism bombs at the “emulators of Hitler.”
Well, some short-sighted Zionists may still think that this is the right way to go but this is wrong because the Zionists are playing on borrowed time and invoking anti-Semitism every time Israel’s vile behavior is criticized serves only to cheapen anti-Semitism in the eyes of the non-Jewish world.
Still, many Zionist supremacists just don’t care, even if they know in the bottom of their hearts that the once effective weapon of anti-Semitism is becoming stale and losing its effectiveness. This is how arrogant and sick minds think. It is the same minds that expect Palestinian children who have just watched their fathers and mothers and relatives mercilessly and brutally killed by Israeli soldiers or Gestapo-like Jewish settlers to love Jews and sing hatikva (the Israeli national anthem) and not harbor a sliver of hate toward Zionism and Jews. Can a Palestinian school child, who has just returned home from school, seeing his home being bulldozed by a Jewish bulldozer, driven by a Jewish soldier, with a helmet bearing the Star of David, harbor love for his and his people’s tormentors? Of course, I am not speaking metaphorically as I witnessed hundreds of house demolitions ever since I was a little kid in the village of Kharsa south west of Hebron.
A final point. Everyone knows too well that most if not all the political parties represented in the Israeli Knesset can be judged as manifestly fascist. Just read the ideological and political platforms of the Habayt ha-Yehudi (the Jewish home,” the Ehud ha-Leumi (the national Union), Shas, whose spiritual leader Ovadia Yosef shamelessly teaches that all non-Jews are donkeys or beasts of burden, and even the Likud, and you will know what I am talking about.
Now, with clearly Nazi-like parties represented in the Israeli Knesset, do Zionists have a moral right to complain about some political parties in Greece or the Ukraine or Norway?
I hope that this and similar articles will provide some food for thought to Jews who might be prompted to think that life itself is hasbara and that if you succeed in this field you get it done.
No, life is not Hazbara, and if Jews succeed in obliterating the truth for sometime, they won’t be successful for ever.
Jews have much to do in terms of getting their own house clean. They’d better get busy putting their house in order rather than hurling baseless charges and accusations here and there.
People living in glass houses don’t throw stones at people’s houses.
I’ve never seen a President — I don’t care who he is — stand up to them (i.e. Zionist Jews). The Israelis know what is going on all the time. I got to the point where I wasn’t writing anything down. If Americans understood what a grip these people have got on our government, they would rise up in arms. Our citizens don’t have any idea what goes on”.
Admiral Thomas H. Moorer, U.S. Navy & Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
March 30th, 2003, Karachi, Pakistan: 11 days after the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq, masked gunmen kidnap scientist Dr. Aafia Siddiqui and her children.
Aafia, 31, is taken to U.S. occupied Afghanistan; held hostage in an American run torture chamber at Bagram and separated from her children; Mohammed Ahmad, aged 6, Mariyum, aged 4 and six month old baby Suleiman: missing, presumed dead; murdered in U.S. custody.
Tortured by her captors, Dr. Aafia endured 5 years of physical and psychological abuse. Fellow hostage Moazzam Begg (later taken to Guantanamo Bay, U.S. occupied Cuba) recounts a woman’s sobs and screams in Bagram, and how his captors implied that it was the sound of his wife being tortured in an adjoining cell.
THE SHOW TRIAL
Aafia is then put on a plane to New York, imprisoned in solitary confinement for 2 years, bought before a kangaroo court run by Judge Ronald Ellis who bans all live media coverage, denies bail and repeatedly spouts proven lies and Israeli approved conspiracy theories about 9/11. Ellis sets the trial date and the case is handed over to Judge Berman.
Corrupt, pro-Israeli Judge Richard M. Berman (who was promoted to senior status on 9/11), presided over the macabre, Sanhedrin show trial like a pernicious Basilisk, safe in the knowledge that the pacified, castrated shills of the corporate media wouldn’t dare delve into his murky past as an aide to Jewish Senator Jacob Javtis. Berman’s predecessor in that role was a loquacious fellow by the name of Harold Wallace Rosenthal. Mossad murdered Rosenthal in 1976 because he was deemed to have revealed too much about the self-chosen:
Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer”.
Harold Wallace Rosenthal, aide to Senator Jacob Javits.
Berman, needless to say, would never make that mistake, and was well aware of what his Rothschild run, Israeli handlers were capable of should he ever stray off message.
Berman gradually became a prominent figure in extremist Jewry’s ongoing campaign to curtail public awareness and civil liberties en route to implementing a Talmudic police state to suppress any form of free speech that opposes them. Responsible for sentencing media researcher Saleh Elahwal for his work with Lebanese TV news channel ‘Al-Manar’, Berman also supported Brooklyn Jew Dov Hikind in his call for New Yorkers to submit to stop & search and racial profiling; Hikind is a conservative democrat and active cheerleader for Israeli terrorism, who even snuck into Gaza in 2005 to encourage IDF conscripts to maintain the occupation.
It was a given that a guy so deeply entrenched in the swamp of extremist Jewry would do as he was told, after all, who wants to end up shot to pieces in a false flag hi-jack staged by a gaggle of Kidon-Mossad henchmen and their underlings? No-one, and certainly not the right honourable Judge Berman, no, Berman was all in, and prepared to deliver a ‘verdict’ that’d been bought and paid for in 1913, when Rothschild agent Samuel Untermeyer blackmailed President Woodrow Wilson to appoint Zionist Jew Louis Dembitz Brandeis as U.S. Supreme Court Justice.
For not since Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake for heresy, has there been a more depraved and politically motivated spectacle than the one that transpired in the Manhattan Federal District Court on September 23rd 2010:
Dr. Aafia is sentenced to 86 years in prison. And despite the trauma she’s suffered at the hands of extremist Jews and their savage, Shabbat goy enablers; she somehow summons the resolve to issue a softly spoken cri de Coeur that vocalizes the sentiments and beliefs of the civilized majority, and says what cowards and traitors dare not:
This decision has come from Israel”.
Dr. Aafia Siddiqui
The harshest criticism in this respect must, of course, be reserved for the Pakistanis themselves. And though The Islamic Republic of Pakistan has always supported Palestine, refuses to recognize the illegitimate state of Israel and often fights the good fight, its current batch of so-called leaders are amongst the most wretched and servile spawn of Israeli collaborators ever placed into power.
Affia Siddiqui’s mother; Asmat Siddiqui, said it all when news of the ‘verdict’ came through:
The rulers of Muslim world have shown more barbarity than any other dictators in the world by maintaining silence over the issue. But I cannot say anything to anyone, if my country’s rulers did nothing. For six months the US court kept seeking a letter for the release of Dr Aafia Siddiqui from the Pakistani government but not a single word or letter was written.”
The vile, Anglo-American-Israeli appointed Zadari regime in Pakistan is more Zionist than the Zionists, even disgraced former ambassador and aspiring U.S. citizen; Mr. Husain Haqqani, has been caught In flagrante delicto on many occasions, and was found to have been engaged in activities that would constitute a capital charge of high treason under Pakistani law: Mr. Haqqani also stands accused of aiding and abetting the unlawful imprisonment of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui; and obstructing efforts to secure her release. Husain Haqqani, who eagerly doled out visas to U.S. ‘Blackwater’ terrorists, denied U.S. congresswomen and pro-Palestinian campaigner Cynthia McKinney entry into Pakistan. Ms. McKinney planned to visit Pakistan to request the Zardari regime act on Dr. Aafia’s behalf and do the bare minimum to help her. Journalist Yvonne Ridley describes Mr Haqqani’s composure once Ms. McKinney bought his hypocrisy to light:
He squirmed and wriggled after being hoisted by his own petard, but like a worm impaled firmly on a fishhook of his own making, he could not escape the humiliating exposure of his duplicitous behaviour”.
THE WAR ON KNOWLEDGE
The Anglo-American-Israeli policy of targeting academics and scholars who refuse to bend the knee, seems consistent in light of Israeli terrorist attacks in Iran and the murder of scientists Mustafa Ahmadi Roshan, Darioush Rezaeinejad, Majid Shahriari and Masoud Alimohammadi. Mr. Rezaeinejad’s case is particularly troubling, as he was shot dead by masked gunmen on motorbikes as he waited to pick up his 3-year old daughter from nursery.
Israeli sponsored terrorism has also taken a heavy toll in Syria over the past year; Dr. Issa al-Kholi, Director of Hamish Hospital in Damascus was ambushed by three gunmen who lay in wait outside his family home in Rukn Eddin. Professor Mayadeh Anees Sayyiouf of al-Baath University, engineer and nuclear scientist Aws Abdul-Kareem Khalil, head of Thoracic Surgery Department at Homs National Hospital Dr. Hassan Eid, Dr. Mustafa Mohammad Safar from Bisan Hospital, Ruba Ibrahim; a teacher at the National Center for Excelled Students in Homs, Talal Na’eem al-Qatreeb; an engineer from Homs Refinery, Fatima Khalifa; an engineer from the General Company for Electric Power Generation in Mhardeh, head of Douma Electricity Department engineering Firas Qaddar and technical assistant Bassam Barakat were also assassinated by pro-Israeli terror groups.
Extremist Jews, fully in synch with their Talmudic mindset and seemingly instinctive parasitism, were among the first to applaud these attacks and among the most vocal in defending torture and calling for Dr. Aafia to be condemned as quickly as possible.
And you can cite all the amendments and laws you like; extremist Jews and their Christian Zionist sidekicks will simply laugh in your face, and not without good reason, because anyone who hasn’t noticed the death of decency and the absence of the rule of law, obviously hasn’t been paying attention. The mere fact that criminal and pro-Israeli stooge Newt Gingrich can openly solicit the murder of Iranian scientists in a presidential candidates debate, is evidence enough of the wet rot that’s soaked into every pore of U.S. society, decaying the entire edifice from within.
The fact is that the U.S. has been an extremist Jew occupied regime since the Rothschild’s scurried back into power through bribery and blackmail in 1913. A nation riddled with Talmudic depravity cannot call itself free by any definition of the word, it ceases to be a nation but becomes a warped, decaying harbinger of criminality; a danger to itself and others. In simple terms, the U.S., unless it acts, will collapse like every other host the parasite has fed off since time immemorial.
The case of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui goes beyond that of a mother, a sister, an innocent woman, but is the litmus test for the survival of a nation and the destiny that nation has chosen for itself: History is littered with the cadavers of countries and empires that were hollowed out by the malignant cancer of Talmudism; not through strength of arms or direct war but by appeasement, corrosive collaboration, aid and comfort.
Self-inflicted destruction or self-enacted preservation? This is the stark choice we face today, our illegitimate leaders who dissemble in the guise of men and women, would gladly betray their own citizens as captives to those who would win us without blows. To rely upon this common cry of curs shows a naivety beyond measure. For how can those whose only recollection of honour is a faded memory of an idea they surrendered long ago; on their backs, legs apart and screaming beneath the inbred sodomites of Jewish extremism, help us; when they can’t even save themselves from slavery?
The civilised world simply can’t afford to wait for the enemy to raise their standard in Satanic triumph; for when they bring ‘Abu Ghraib’ to your home, when Goyim become as docile as the cattle they perceive us all to be and the abomination of Israel hangs over a once free and vibrant people, like the stench of death itself. It’ll be far too late, and perhaps too long a wait to turn the tide on these parasites.
Standing up to the Anglo-American-Israeli crime gang, Dr Affia took a bullet for us all, so if we fail to save her and actively de-legitimize the corrupt and compromised U.S. judicial system; we may as well have betrayed her to the enemy ourselves. Dr. Aafia is a prisoner of conscience, and successive U.S. regimes have proven themselves to be part of an endemically corrupt, Rothschild controlled criminal network. They’ve thrown down the Gauntlet for us all: ‘Bring us to justice if you can’, they taunt from afar. And the one question that will define the coming decade is simply this: Who dares accept their challenge?
Much is made of how President Obama’s position on same-sex marriage has “evolved” to an endorsement of legalization. One hopes his position on the atrocity called the “war on drugs” is evolving.
It’s not really a war on drugs. It’s a war on people, most of whom have committed no violence or other aggression against person or property. Those who do commit violence are encouraged to do so by the very “war on drugs” that Obama and other enlightened leaders so enthusiastically support. Black markets often feature violence — precisely because they are illegal. Decriminalize the activity, and the violence goes away.
America had a natural experiment in this principle: Prohibition. When the manufacture and sale of alcohol were made illegal by constitutional amendment in 1920, booze didn’t disappear from society. It simply went underground to be dominated by those with a comparative advantage in thuggery. Ending prohibition brought alcohol into the legitimate market (although unfortunately regulated and licensed). The violence related to the manufacture and sale of alcohol went away.
Thus the violence perpetrated by Latin American drug cartels and gangs in the United States is not an argument against decriminalization. It’s an argument for it.
It’s well known that an unconscionably high percentage of the American population is in prison. We can thank the government’s persecution of drug commerce for that shameful fact. It is also increasingly understood that militarized police drug raids terrorize people every day, often killing individuals who were not even intended as targets. The American people should demand that this systematic oppression be stopped. The police have become the enemy of Americans, mostly but not exclusively members of minority communities.
The raids that end in death at least make the headlines and perhaps upset people for a short while. But another part of the war on drug commerce gets less attention. When consenting people buy and sell drugs, there is no victim to complain. So to make arrests, police need to trap people — many of them young — in drug transactions and then threaten them with long jail terms unless they become informants. Many take these deals — against their deepest beliefs — for fear of having their lives destroyed by felony convictions and time in the hell holes we call prisons. They proceed to set up drug deals with friends and family members just so they can produce cases for the cops and leniency for themselves.
Can there be a worse indictment of the sadistic government crusade against drugs? What possible good is done by police blackmailing the most vulnerable, even helpless, people into informing on others? Cooperation with the police under these circumstances, despite the duress, is morally wrong — but we mustfirst condemn the police — and politicians who back them — for putting people in this situation. What kind of society is this? It does not deserve to be called humane.
But drugs are dangerous, people say. It’s about time this empty slogan was thrown on the trash heap. Illegal drugs are not illegal because they are dangerous. Other substances that can be used in harmful ways — most obviously alcohol — are legal. Many legal activities that people love to engage in are highly dangerous. Certain drugs have been singled out for prohibition historically not because they are especially dangerous but because they were associated with minority communities. The story of the “drug war” is not of a humane effort to create a healthy, safe society. It’s a story of persecution and control — and of tax-funded largess for law enforcement and the “drug-rehabilitation” industry.
Politicians in Latin America are beginning to understand that the drug wars tearing their countries apart would end overnight if the drug industry were decriminalized. No one would be more opposed to decriminalization than the drug lords, because they’d lose their de facto monoplies.
But who patronizingly insists that Latin America stay with its destructive policy? President Obama–an admitted youthful drug user himself–and his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. They would rather see the violence continue and spill over into the United States than admit they are wrong.
No drug could do even a tiny fraction of the damage that the drug war does. Mr. Obama, when will your position evolve?
(Originally published by the Future of Freedom Foundation, where Sheldon Richman is senior fellow.)
When I posted Sharmine Narwani’s provocative article Excuse Me, But Israel Has No Right to Exist on Facebook, I got an inappropriate reaction from libertarians. It was summed up by one comment this way:
No territorial State has the right to exist. They are all organisations against individual rights and liberties.
This answer is true but inappropriate. Why?
Narwani was not tendering a general proposition in political philosophy. She had no intention of operating in the realm of abstraction on this occasion. Rather, she was making a point that seems to elude people, including many (most?) libertarians. Narwani was drawing attention to the fact that invocation of the Jewish State of Israel’s “right to exis” is intended to derail any effort to focus on the right of Palestinian individuals to live on and work the land they and their families have inhabited for more than a thousand years (and perhaps much further back.) Changing the subject to the State of Israel’s alleged right to exist—and that’s what this move is, a change of subject—is designed to make sure that the rights of Palestinians are never discussed.
Imagine you caught a burglar in your home pilfering your silverware. Now imagine that when you demanded he put your property down, he responded, “Wait. Before we talk about that, I demand that you first acknowledge my right to exist in this spot with these things in my hands.” You would not regard that demand as legitimate.
To proclaim Israel’s right exist is to proclaim that a political entity founded by a group of individuals on an ideology of ethno-racial chauvinism has a moral right to land it obtained through brutal ethnical cleansing. The Zionist movement had (and has) as its premise that Palestine is “Jewish land” and that the non-Jews are unfit for it. Thus it had (has) to be “redeemed.” The outcome was what the Palestinians call the nakba, or catastrophe. The political entity known as Israel thus occupies land stolen from the Palestinian people.
That is the context from which to judge all that goes on in Palestine/Israel today. This is no “dispute” or “conflict” in the sense that two sides have roughly equal claims to the same land and resources. The claims are no more equal than those of my hypothetical homeowner and burglar. (”Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their country…. We have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?” –David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister, quoted in Nahum Goldman, The Jewish Paradox.) Contrition therefore belongs on the Jewish, not the Palestinian, side. (I hope no one will say that a UN General Assembly vote made this all morally acceptable.)
(For details see Jeremy Hammond’s excellent brief introduction, The Rejection of Palestinian Self-Determination. For a close examination of the Zionists’ alleged purchases of land see Stephen P. Halbrook’s “The Alienation of a Homeland.” On the systematic efforts to cleanse the nakba from history see Neve Gordon’s “Erasing the Nakba.” For the Jewish case against Zionism, rooted in the Prophetic tradition, see Jack Ross’s biography, Rabbi Outcast: Elmer Berger and American Jewish Anti-Zionism. But you need not take their word for it. Consult an Israeli historian, Benny Morris, who thinks ethnic cleansing was a good thing but did not go far enough.)
We may put it another way: Israel is the only country I can think of that, de jure, does not belong to all its citizens. (I am not saying that other countries actually operate as though they belonged to their citizens.) As the self-proclaimed “Jewish State,” Israel is said to belong not to its citizens but to the Jewish People worldwide. Under the “Law of Return,” anyone who qualifies as a Jew (that is, has a Jewish mother and hasn’t converted to another religion or was converted to Judaism by an approved rabbi) may become a full citizen merely by moving to Israel. Note the word “return.” A Jewish person who “makes aliyah” need not have ever lived in Israel, so she would not literally be returning. (It’s merely assumed, despite reasons for assuming otherwise, that her ancient ancestors might have once lived in Palestine.)
On the other hand, a Palestinian who was one of the million-plus Arabs driven from their villages in 1948 (or even earlier) or 1967 and who could therefore actually return to her home is prohibited from doing so. Her home has long been confiscated, perhaps demolished. In fact her entire village may have been leveled to make way for an exclusively Jewish town. (More than 500 such villages were destroyed during the period of Israeli independence.)
Yes, the Muslim, Christian, and secular Arabs who were not among the 750,000 who fled what became Israel in 1948 were allowed to become citizens of the Jewish State, with the vote and representation in the Knesset. But there’s less here than meets the eye. Non-Jews are second (third?)-class citizens who get inferior government services and who have no power to change Israel’s official designation as the state of the Jewish People. Indeed, any political party that aspires to change that designation is outlawed. A recent law requires new non-Jewish citizens to pledge allegiance to Israel as a “Jewish, democratic [sic] state.” In 2010 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed, as a condition for progress in negotiations, that Palestinian leaders acknowledge Israel as “the national state of the Jewish People.” It is worth noting that until a 2005 legal challenge, the Israeli identity card identified citizens not as Israeli but as Jewish, Arab, Druze and Circassian, and so on. Citizens are still so designated in government records.
Thus, in this context, when libertarians say “all states are illegitimate,” they blur a critical distinction and give those who occupy Palestinian property and otherwise oppress Palestinian individuals an undeserved pass. I imagine that an ardent Zionist would much rather hear that response than one that perceives and exposes the real intent behind the proclamation of Israel’s right to exist: the negation of the rights of Palestinians.
I shouldn’t have to mention this but I will: To say that the state of Israel has no right to exist is not to say that the individuals living in Israel have no right to exist—quite the contrary–and the Palestinians would agree. That raises the question of how best to proceed in achieving justice for the long-suffering Palestinians. This is a complicated question to which there is no easy answer. But here’s one thing advocates of universal freedom and justice can say: The rights of the Palestinians must not be plastered over by irrelevant claims about the Jewish State’s right to exist.
The Dictator-A Film Review by Gilad Atzmon
On the face of it, Baron Cohen’s The Dictator is a horrid film. It is vulgar, it isn’t funny and if it has five good jokes in it, they appear in the two minute official trailer. In short, save your time and money – unless of course, you are interested in Jewish identity politics and neurosis.
Similar to Cohen’s previous work, The Dictator is, once again, a glimpse into Cohen’s own tribal morbidity. After all, the person and the spirit behind this embarrassing comedy is a proud self-loving character who never misses an opportunity to express his intimate affinity to his people, their unique comic talent and their beloved Jewish state. But let’s face it, Cohen isn’t alone, after all, he has created The Dictator together with a Hollywood studio. So, it’s reasonable to say that what we see here is just one more Hollywood-orchestrated effort to vilify the Arab, the Muslim and the Orient.
I guess that Arab rulers, regimes and politics are an ideal subject for a satirical take, still, one may wonder what exactly does Sacha Baron Cohen know about the Arab World? As far as the film can tell, not much. Instead, Cohen projects his own Zionist and tribal symptoms onto the people of Arabia and their leaders.
In the film, Cohen plays General Hafez Aladeen, the Arab ruler of the oil-rich North African rogue state Wadiya. On the face of it, he is the satirical version of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi, but in reality, Aladeen’s actions are no less than a vast amplification of the crimes committed by Israel and its war criminals such as Shimon Peres, Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni.
When Baron Cohen ridicules the Arab Dictators who obsessively seek WMD and nuclear weapons he should bear in mind that it is actually his beloved Jewish state that has, since the 1950s, been pushing the entire region into a nuclear race. It is his Israeli brothers and sisters who express every too often their lethal enthusiasm to destroy Iran and other regional entities. When Baron Cohen mocks the Arab rulers who murder their opponents and kill kids, women and elders, he once again projects Israeli symptoms because it is actually the Jewish state that so often engages in systematic mass murder and war crimes on a colossal scale. Someone should remind Cohen that the pictures of white phosphorus pouring over UN shelters were taken in Gaza, not in Saddam’s Baghdad, Homs (Sirya) or imaginary Wadiya. When Sacha Baron Cohen presents the Arab leader as a savage rapist he may want to remind himself that Moshe Katzav, who was, until recently, the President of the Jewish State is now locked behind bars after being sentenced for rape. It is therefore far from coincidence that when Cohen attempts to bond with his protagonist Dictator Aladeen, he actually speaks in his mother tongue, Hebrew. Cohen speaks Hebrew because Aladeen is not an Arab dictator, he is actually an Israeli patriot like Cohen himself.
But let’s try to transcend ourselves beyond Baron Cohen’s projections and confess: as much as Cohen’s new film is lame, Cohen, himself is far from being a fool. In fact, he has managed to bring to light a few interesting and astute political insights. For example, towards the end of the film Dictator Aladeen produces a remarkable speech at the UN in favour of dictatorship. In front of the delegations, Aladeen draws a pretty profound list of unintended parallels between the USA and dictatorship. Delivering a sharp political criticism by means of comedy deserves respect.
Another provocative insight is delivered through the character of Zoey (Anna Farris), a devout feminist and a human right activist. Zoey runs a multi-ethnic eco-friendly grocery store in Brooklyn. She is the ultimate solidarity campaigner and this time she rallies against Aladeen and his regime. While Zoey invades the street demonstrating against Aladeen’s brutality, Aladeen’s Chief of Staff Tamir (Ben Kingsley) plots against his ruler inside the UN building. He sells out his country’s assets to oil tycoons and world leaders. The cinematic meaning of it all is clear- the bond between the so-called Left and the imperial powers has been established. Zoey, the lefty progressive seems to work towards the exact same goal as the leading corrupted capitalist expansionist forces. They all want to bring the Aladeen regime to an end. I guess that many of those who monitor solidarity activism and discourse would agree with Cohen’s readings. After all, it was feminists and women’s rights groups that, in the 1990s, prepared the ground for the War against Terror and the invasion of Afghanistan. The Left was also very reluctant to support the democratically elected Hamas. I guess that a Leftist, thrown into a room together with Dershowitz and Bin Laden, would probably attempt to bond first with Dershowitz.
But Zoey isn’t just a progressive solidarity and human right activists. As the plot progresses, Aladeen and Zoey fall for each other. Towards the end of the film ‘solidarity activist’ Zoey and Dictator Aladeen get married. This is when Dictator Aladeen and the rest of us find out that Zoey is actually a Jew. From a cinematic perspective, the Jew, the human right campaigner and the solidarity activist leader are all one. This amusing reading is unfortunately consistent with the reality of the solidarity movement. Those who monitor Jewish Left activism detect a relentless effort among some Jewish campaigners to tribally hijack and even Zionize the discourse of solidarity, human rights and marginal politics. However, from a Judaic perspective, Zoey, the new wife of Dictator Aladeen is nothing short of an incarnation of Biblical Queen Esther. Like Esther, Zoey has managed to infiltrate into the corridors of a lucrative foreign power.
I guess that with AIPAC controlling American foreign policy and 80% of Tory MPs being CFI (Conservative Friends of Israel) members, a Jewish queen of a fictional Wadiya is almost exotic.
The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics
Previous reviews of Baron Cohen’s films:
Some Things To Keep In Mind While Watching Borat by Gilad Atzmon
As Britain is labelled the centre of anti Israel hatred, Israel sets about scraping the barrel and comes up with Hasan Afzal. Israel is doomed!
I wonder if he feels an idiot now for saying that there is no War on Islam since the official confirmation hit the headlines? Probably not! We have to assume that he has very thick skin.
What I want to know is just how lucrative is it being pro Zionist and anti Islam for Muslims? We should be told.
Surah An Nisa (The Women) 4 – 139
الَّذِينَ يَتَّخِذُونَ الْكَافِرِينَ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِن دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَيَبْتَغُونَ عِندَهُمُ الْعِزَّةَ فَإِنَّ العِزَّةَ لِلّهِ جَمِيعًا
Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor [through power]? But indeed, honor belongs to Allah entirely.
It was during the 1980’s US/Saudi-financed mujahadeen offensive on the Afghan people that Dubai – one of the emirates comprising the United Arab Emirates (UAE) – became a duty-free port and drug money laundry, serving much the same role as Hong Kong had for the Illuminati banksters during the Vietnam War. In 2007 Halliburton moved it’s headquarters to Dubai.
Where Hong Kong had financed CIA opium for arms swaps in the Golden Triangle, Dubai served the CIA smack for weapons trade in the Golden Crescent – an area which comprises parts of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Golden Crescent opium production eclipsed Golden Triangle production just as the CIA was springing into action in Afghanistan. While international banks in Dubai laundered the proceeds, Sharjah – another UAE emirate – housed a duty-free airport specializing in covert weapons shipments. 
Gold is the currency of drug and weapons traffickers and Dubai is the favorite hub in the global bullion trade. The British Bank of the Middle East dominates the Dubai gold trade. It is 100% owned by Hong Kong Shanghai Bank (HSBC), which also monopolizes the Hong Kong gold trade along with Kleinwort Benson, which has close relations with Rio Tinto, a company founded on Matheson family opium proceeds. Matheson’s heirs are the Keswick and Swire families which dominate the board of directors at HSBC, Jardine Matheson, P&O Nedlloyd and Cathay Pacific Airlines. 
Kleinwort’s Sharps Pixley subsidiary is one of five firms that gather daily at N. M. Rothschild & Sons in London to unilaterally “fix” the price of gold. Another is Mocatta Metals which is majority-owned by Standard Chartered – the bank Cecil Rhodes founded – where P&O’s Lord Inchcape sits on the board. P&O is the world’s largest port operator. Mocatta is a favorite conduit for Israeli Mossad financing.
Midland Bank subsidiary Samuel Montagu is a third London gold “fixer”. Midland was bought by HSBC in 1999 and is partially owned by the Kuwaiti al-Sabah clan. The other two gold fixers are Johnson Matthey and N. M. Rothschild, both of which have interlocking boards with Anglo-American and HSBC. 
Anglo-American – controlled by South Africa’s Oppenheimer family – owns both Engelhardt, which enjoys a near monopoly in refining the world’s gold, and DeBeers, which monopolizes the global diamond trade.
It was the mysterious Count of Saint-Germain who first claimed to possess the esoteric knowledge necessary for the transmutation of metals like gold and for removing flaws from diamonds. The Count stayed for a time with William IX of Hesse, whose financial adviser was Mayer Rothschild. The Count may have imparted his secret wisdom upon young Mayer and his House of Hesse employer, who in partnership came to control the Cabalistic Frankfurt Freemason Lodge which housed the German Illuminati. 
Diamonds are important in the laundering of drug money since they are small and easy to transport, yet hold great value. Sir Harry Oppenheimer’s De Beers controls 85% of the global wholesale diamond market. De Beers is a subsidiary of Anglo-American where Sir Harry sits on the board.
The current De Beers chairman is Nicky Oppenheimer. De Beers’ most valuable diamond mines are in southern Africa. One called Jwaneng, at the edge of the Kalahari Desert in Botswana, may be the most valuable property on earth. This vein of kimberlite, which produces diamonds, was only discovered in 1973. De Beers also mines diamonds from off-shore platforms off the coast of Namibia.
The world’s largest store of diamonds sits under De Beers London headquarters. The company sells rough diamonds ten times a year in London to 125 hand-picked customers at a take-it-or-leave-it set price. De Beers was indicted in 1994 for price-fixing by the US Justice Department and to this day company officials do not set foot on US soil for fear they may be nabbed by US authorities. 
Diamond cutting was until recently done in only two places in the world- Antwerp, Belgium and Ashqelon, Israel. In Antwerp the cutting was financed by Banque Bruxelles-Lambert, which is controlled by the Lambert family – cousins to the Rothschilds and owners of the scandal-ridden Drexel Burnham Lambert.
In Israel the cutting was financed by Bank Leumi, Israel’s biggest finance house which is controlled by the British Barclays Bank. Sir Harry Oppenheimer also sits on the Barclay’s board. 
Recently Gujarat, India has become the location of choice for 90% of global diamond cutting due to the cheap labor it affords. Bangkok, Tel Aviv and New York handle the rest. Eighty percent of diamond trading still occurs in Antwerp.
De Beers, like gold-fixer Standard Chartered, was founded by Cecil Rhodes in South Africa during the 1880’s. Rhodes’ last will and testament created the Royal Institute for International Affairs which spawned the Council on Foreign Relations. Rhodes Scholars like Bill Clinton are funded by the Rhodes Trust.
The principal trustee for the Rhodes estate is Lord Alfred Milner, who in 1899 provoked the Boer War through which Britain and Rhodes gained control over South Africa’s diamond and gold mines. There, black South Africans toil in one of the world’s most dangerous jobs and receive almost nothing for enriching the Oppenheimers and their cronies.
The world’s three biggest mining companies – BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Anglo American – are controlled by Oppenheimer/Rothschild/RD/Shell mob. In 2010 the first two talked of merging.
Rhodes was a leader in European Freemasonry, where he mingled with the likes of the Rothschilds, King George IV, King William IV, Lord Randolph Churchill (Winston’s father), the Marquis of Salisbury, Arthur Conan Doyle, Rudyard Kipling and Oscar Wilde.
The group was preoccupied with the notion of an Aryan super-race, a notion shared by Adolf Hitler and the ruling paradigm for the South African apartheid regime. Their “secret knowledge” of human creation, which defies both creationist and evolutionary theories, is bound up in the tale of the Anunnaki, who according to recently uncovered Sumerian clay tablets arrived around 6000 BC in Sumeria from planet Nubira.
A growing number of researchers led by Zechariah Sitchin say the Annunaki bred human slaves known in the Hebrew bible as Adamu and in English as Earthlings to mine gold necessary to patch up a hole in Nubira’s ozone layer which was caused by a collision with another planet. One Anunnaki leader was named Nazi. The alien gods who created “Adam” called their Mesopotamian colony E.DIN. They traveled the world in search of gold, which NASA scientists agree would be the best patch for our own ozone problem. Scientists have discovered mining operations going back as far as 100,000 BC in Africa, South and Central America. 
The Adamus who left Eden became gold mining slaves and their worldwide deployment may explain the many holes in evolutionary and anthropological theories of the day. It may also explain phenomena such as the Nazca Lines in Peru and the Great Pyramids of Egypt.
Adam and his descendants became slaves to these Lords. The biblical Hebrew term avod which is commonly translated “worship” actually means “work”. Adam and the biblical characters were not worshiping God, they were working for him as slaves. And “God” may connote the Anunnaki invaders.
The Sumerian tablets provide an intriguing explanation as to why man settled into agriculture in Mesopotamia from the much easier and more sustainable practice of hunting and gathering.
The tablets state simply that the Annunaki gods made them do it. Cities grew and the Annunaki placed one of its god/human hybrids in charge of each new urban center. These rulers became Kings, their dynastic right to rule based on bloodlines to the Anunnaki.
The first such king was Cush, who was Noah’s grandson and the father of Nimrod. Some researchers believe Yahweh was actually Annunaki earth mission commander Enli, who was a brutal tyrant.
Abraham, who all major religions claim as their patriarch, may have also been an Anunnaki hybrid. The secret knowledge Abraham purveyed serves as the basis for all modern secret societies, from Freemasonry to Cabala to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Whether true or not, what is important is that the Illuminati elite believe that these special bloodlines give them the God-given right to enslave all Earthlings.
By the mid-1890s Freemason Cecil Rhodes launched the Diamond Syndicate, whose successor Central Selling Organization still monopolizes the global diamond trade. Rhodes’ forays were financed by the Rothschild family.
In November 1997, when Baron Edmond Rothschild died in Geneva, he left in his trust substantial holdings in De Beers.  According to former British Intelligence officer John Coleman, author of The Committee of 300, “Rhodes was principal agent for the Rothschilds…who dispossessed the South African Boers of their birthright, the gold and diamonds that lay beneath their soil.”
Coleman fails to mention that the Boers were themselves invaders and that black South Africans held the true birthright to this vast wealth. Still, Coleman’s statement regarding the Rhodes/Rothschild relationship appears on the mark.
In 1888 Cecil Rhodes wrote his third will and left everything to Lord Rothschild. Rhodes, Milner and Rothschild founded the Business Roundtable in London in early 1900 which charted a course for expansion of the British Empire and for Crown control over the global economy that exists to this day.
 “Al Qaeda and the Gold Trail that Leads Through Dubai to September 11”. Douglas Farah. The Guardian. 2-19-02.
 Dope Inc.: The Book that Drove Kissinger Crazy. The Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. Washington, DC. 1992. p.193
 Ibid. p.194
 Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History that Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons and the Great Pyramids. Jim Marrs. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 2000.
 “Diamonds: The Real Story”. Andrew Cockburn. National Geographic. March 2002.
 Editors of Executive Intelligence Review. p.200
 The 12th Planet. Zechariah Sitchin. Avon Books. New York. 1985.
 Marrs. p.86
Dean Henderson is the author of Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf: Four Horsemen, Eight Families & Their Global Intelligence, Narcotics & Terror Network, The Grateful Unrich: Revolution in 50 Countries and Das Kartell der Federal Reserve. Subscribe to his Left Hook weekly column FREE at www.deanhenderson.wordpress.com
Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: A few days ago we came across a vile email exchange between three, so-called, Jewish ‘anti’ Zionists and Mr. Mazin Qumsiyeh, leading Palestinian intellectual and peace activist. Regretfully, the three Jewish ethnic campaigners used an abusive and patronizing language that left some of us bewildered and hurt. But Dr Qumsiyeh didn’t shy away, compassionately he answered the AZZ (Anti Zionist Zionists) putting into play every possible rule of reason. But his words were in vain. The infamous Tony Greenstein foolishly circulated the exchange and made his level of abusive language once again into public knowledge. I myself passed the exchange to Jeff Blankfort and a few others. Here is Blankfort’s open letter to Gabriel Ash. Once realising that he is about to be exposed, Ash tried to stop the publication of the following letter. However, Jeff Blankfort is made of a different material. His integrity is never compromised. This letter is published with Mr. Blankfort’s Consent.
Last night, Gilad forwarded to me the correspondence that is apparently being circulated by Tony Greenstein, he of the poison pen, among you, Abraham Weizfeld, and Mazin Qumsiyeh regarding an upcoming conference in Munich on the future of Palestine in which Mazin is participating together with Ghada Karmi, Norton Mezvinsky, and Oren Ben Dor with whom I am not familiar, and the objections to this conference on your part, as well as Greenstein and Weizfeld, based upon the latter’s discovery that Mazin was not a signatory to that unforgivable and contemptible letter circulated, to his everlasting discredit, by Ali Abumimah, denouncing, in terms, worthy of Joe McCarthy, Alan Dershowitz, and Abe Foxman, the estimable Gilad Atzmon who you and your fellow Jewish tribalists seem to see as the éminence grise behind the conference.
Before reading your contribution to this exchange, despite our disagreements over the role of the American Jewish establishment in dictating US Middle East policy, I had otherwise respected you but our point of disagreement turned out to be more important than I first thought. It is considerably more than a red line being nothing less than the division between political realists on one hand and Jewish tribalists on the other, and you have shown that you are just as eager to circle the wagons when Jews are criticized collectively as any full throated Zionist yahoo. That you have further besmirched yourself by comparing Atzmon with Meir Kahane is therefore fully consistent with where you, Greenstein and Weizfeld appear on the political spectrum. Weizfeld, who I have long considered a certifiable nutcase, founded something called “The Jewish People’s Liberation Organization,” (ROTFLMAO) and claims to “have functioned as an intermediary on behalf of the Palestinians to the Western (North American) societies and, on behalf of the Jewish People to the Palestinian and Arab Nations since 1968.” <http://www.angelfire.com/co3/alaqsaintifada/auth3.html>I need not bother to point out further the arrogance of such a statement since it speaks for itself. As for Greenstein, he has written that attacks on the pro-Israel Lobby “are the first step towards holocaust denial.” You certainly are in fine company, Gabriel.
Frankly, despite the time and energy I have spent exposing the nefarious role in support of Israel played by organized Jewry at every level of American society, political, economic, and social, my biggest problems, from a personal political standpoint, have come from left wing Jews, beginning with those, among them close family friends, Jewish communists, who were ready to lynch me back in 1971 when they learned I had spent four months with the Palestinians in the refugee camps of Lebanon and Jordan. Their anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab racism was so intense that in 1973, when the CPUSA paper, the People’s World, put out a photo calendar (without having anything to do with the photo selection), they had to excise a photo I had taken in Jordan’s Schneller Camp of young Palestinian women with guns in order to sell it to the comrades.
Successive generations have become only more sophisticated. Leftist Jews from the various Marxist and Trotskyist organizations made sure that the Palestinian issue would be segregated from all the other people’s liberation struggles–even while claiming to be anti-Zionist (a word for me that has lost all meaning)–and this lasted up until the first US war on Iraq and then their bleats were limited to that ridiculous slogan that most Americans do not understand, “End the Occupation!” Not a word about stopping US aid to Israel, not a word about AIPAC or the pro-Israel Lobby and when I started speaking about it in the 80s, I found myself marginalized, not only by the faux Jewish solidarity activists but by Palestinian groups, as well, whose leaders had been thoroughly colonized by the Jewish activists and by that pied piper of disinformation. Noam Chomsky, who even Israel Shahak, his old friend, had to admit, served AIPAC’s cause. <www.leftcurve.org/LC29WebPages/Chomsky.html> Not surprisingly, no Jew would debate me regarding the Lobby. Chomsky, even when we were on friendly terms, Joel Beinin, Phyllis Bennis, Mitchell Plitnick and the JVP crowd. Chomsky, Beinin and Bennis, said the same thing, “it wouldn’t be useful.” To whom they didn’t say but I can tell you.
What Gilad has provided is an explanation for this phenomenon and the hysterical responses to what he has written from Jews such as yourself, from Greenstein and Weizfeld and the earlier railing against him by the International Anti-Zionist Jewish Network confirms his theory for which, I assume, he is much appreciative. I have read his book and while I don’t agree with all his conclusions, I do agree with the most important, his analysis of Jewish identity and the problems it creates in the political sphere and not only for the Palestinians. If you do not think that the build-up for a war against Iran and the draconian sanctions against that country and its people have been directed by Jews, inside and outside of the US government, on Israel’s behalf, you are not only in denial, you are part of the problem. If you do not think that the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians in 1948, followed by the 1967 war, and the decades of occupation and dispossession of the Palestinians, are primarily the responsibility of Israeli Jews and their supporters internationally, you are part of the problem since, whatever else you may say or do, you are providing protective cover for the perpetrators.
Suspicions are aroused when the founder of the discredited group Quilliam Foundation, Majid Nawaz who has strong pro Israeli supporters, heads off to Pakistan to “…to counter the spread of extremist ideology within Pakistan, predominantly amongst younger generations of Pakistanis, who now constitute 63% of the total population”.
‘Khudi’ has been set up in Pakistan by one of the founders of the QF, Majid Nawaz whose continual scare mongering against the growth of Islamic extremism in Britain and the need for government surveillance against Muslims, not only gave support to fascist far right wing and pro Israel groups but also encouraged Islamophobia perpetuating a climate of hate with increasing attacks on women in hijabs, while The English Defense League marched through streets calling out ‘Death to Muslims’.
One of the patrons of the QF is Jemima Khan, who according to Mr. Nawaz is a close friend; the Foundation which received huge government funding was set up to counteract ‘extremism’ amongst the Muslims.
What can the definition of extremism be when you are funded by the government?
A secret counterterrorism strategy report in 2009, dubbed “ Contest 2” would identify Muslims as “extremist” if they hold views that clash with what the government defines as “shared British values,” reported Vikram Dodd in the Guardian.
According to Shahid Khan, the publisher of South Asia Tribune an Independent UK based English newspaper: “The fact that Khudi has been established in Pakistan by government paid stooges like Majid Nawaz to target the growing younger population of Pakistan, means the West is not only worried about the country being a nuclear state but also about controlling the youth, and Imran Khan may be part of that strategy, until a new cricketing hero rears his head, only he has the ability to mobilize the youth”.
At a time when Pakistan is on brink of disaster, with corruption rife, tragic deaths a daily occurrence, depicted by the western press as a ‘failed state’, all eyes are on Imran Khan who according to his fresh faced young supporters ‘will get rid of the corruption, tell the Americans to go home, and reign in the chaos.’
His party Tehreek e Insaf is doing well in the polls and according to Newsweek which wrote a very supportive article on Khan, he is the ‘Most Popular Leader in Pakistan’
When the Western media supports you with positive headlines, you know they have approved you and that in itself is a worrying fact.
Khan is riding on a wave of popularity with a strong backing from a favourable western media, many promoting him as the next Prime Minister; he is lucky to receive such attention from a media which attempts to ignore the human tragedy of ‘inconceivable magnitude taking place’ in Pakistan. Ismail Salami writes:
“Only in April 2012, more than 250 Shia Muslims were maimed and killed in broad daylight. Around 150 pairs of Shias’ eyes were cut out of their sockets; many of them died while their faces had been smashed with stones or sprayed with acid.”
Khan may be saying all the right things like pointing out that US drone attacks are killing innocents and as a result breeding extremism, however is he aware that Drone attacks are just part of a long term strategy which includes extremist groups funded by Israel and India to create sectarian divisions and civil war?
If America leaves will it stop Israel’s Mossad and India’s RAW from swamping the country with mercenary groups like Xe Water, and Tehrik-I-Taliban who have murdered or wounded thousands of Pakistanis and nearly destroyed the economy with an aim to create a civil war.
This was clearly revealed by the Raymond Davies incident who not only ruthlessly killed Pakistanis but was also found to be supplying information and funds to an Indian/Israeli terrorist cell working with the Taliban.
Recent revelations have shown how in America a Virginia military course taught its officers to prepare for a ‘total war against Islam’.
As Dr Kevin Barret author of ‘Questioning the War on terror’ explains: “Since the Zionist-instigated false-flag attacks of 9/11, the United States of America has been at war with the religion of Islam. The neocon cabal of Zionist Christians and Jews behind 9/11 have tried to disguise their war on Islam as a “war on terror.” But occasionally one of them blurts out the truth: “I always thought it was a mistake not to say what Iraq really was, that is, a war against an expanding Islam,” opined neocon think-tanker James Schall of Georgetown University.”
Pakistan is just one cog in the wheel of the establishment of the “New World Order” which George Bush senior, part of the Zionist neocon cabal first mentioned in his speech to congress in March 6 1991 where he basically outlined a long-term plan for America to dominate the world.
According to Imran Hossein a prominent Islamic scholar, Pakistan is not such a just cog in the wheel, rather it’s a very important target for the Zionist led neo con cabal, firstly because it is strategically very important, secondly it’s a nuclear state and “the only Muslim country with the nuclear capability to stand against Israel’s expansionist plans’.
It is a known fact that any Journalist, academic or world leader who states that Israel was behind 9/11, or questions who is really behind Al Qaeda, will be ostracized by the Zionist owned mainstream media never given air time or allowed to surface as a leader. Pakistan news channels also mostly parrot the western media’s narrative, raising the question who really owns the media there?
Benazir Bhutto along with many in the intelligence community knew that Bin Laden was not hiding out in Pakistan, but was killed off in 2001, she stated it clearly in a Frost interview on November 2 2007.
As a result many have asked the question who has been bombing and blowing up in the name of Al Qaeda?
The former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook shortly before his death told the House of Commons that “Al-Qaeda” is not really a terrorist group but a database of international mujahedeen and arms smugglers used by the CIA.
It is in Israel’s interest to discredit Muslims, all the Al Qaeda videos threatening jihad and bombings have been revealed to be fake and funded by Zionist groups; Adam Gadahn who had masqueraded as Al Qaeda leader in videos making death threats turned out to be a hard core Zionist Jew and was the grandson of Jewish ADL leader Carl Pearlman.
Dr Alan Sabrosky, a US Strategic analyst states: “I am also absolutely certain as a strategic analyst that 9/11 itself, from which all else flows, was a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.
But Mossad did not do it alone. They needed local help within America (and perhaps elsewhere) and they had it, principally from some alumni of PNAC (the misnamed Project for a New American Century) and their affiliates within and outside of the US Government, who in the 9/11 attacks got the “catalytic event” they needed and craved to take the US to war on Israel’s behalf.”
The continual bloodbath in Pakistan will continue, even if the Americans vacate their forces from Pakistan as Jonathan Azaziah explains in his article ‘Hideous Sectarian Killings Reveal Deepening Zionist-Hindutvadi Plots Against Pakistan And Occupied Kashmir’, he writes: “How much more blood must be shed in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan before it is understood that the country is being torn to shreds from the inside out in a foreign-sponsored 4th Generation Warfare (4GW) campaign
He continues: “The real secret war against Pakistan is that which is being conducted by Israel and the Hindutva entity of India. Since the late 1980s, Zionism and Hindutva have signed military agreements and performed covert operations to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear program.”
He argues that in 2001 Mossad and RAW unleashed the codenamed ‘Dragon Policy’ aimed to create an all out ‘sectarian’ chaos within Pakistan, they hired mercenaries, drug lords and mafia figures to unleash the de-stabilization process.
Pakistan has no hope with the established politicians like Nawaz Sharif to President Zardari, their main concern when in power is not to deal with Mossad and RAW activities in Pakistan, but to just acquire as much wealth as they can.
Therefore the main question asked is will Imran Khan be able to deal with the growing subversive aims of Zionists in Pakistan and at the same time remain a ‘darling of the west’?
Already many Pakistanis are suspicious of him and it does not help his image when he takes time out of his busy schedule to fly to London to the aid of Conservative MP Zack Goldsmith his ex brother in law, and campaign on his behalf visiting mosques urging Muslims to vote for him.
Is Mr. Khan aware that this is the same Conservative Party whose leader once declared ‘I am a Zionist’ and over 80% of its MP’s are staunch members of ‘Friends of Israel’?
Does he also realize that two major Zionist funded British think tanks, ‘Centre for Social Cohesion’ and the ‘Policy Exchange’ known for their anti Muslim and Islam stance were set up by Conservative MP’s, one of them being Michael Gove who is now the Secretary of State for Education and has described “Islamism” as an ideology that is similar to fascism’.
Another fact that has cast a shadow on Mr. Khan’s motives and does not help his credibility is the actions of his ex wife Jemima Khan, who has always been at the forefront to support her ex husband, and been a well wisher of Pakistan.
In one of Ms Khan’s tweets she writes “Can’t believe we’re divorced and I’m still Imran’s Achilles’ heel”. According to most Pakistanis she is not an Achilles heel because she is Jewish, rather she is one if she persists in aligning herself with groups whose agenda is to ‘modernise Islam’ or against Muslims.
The fact she is a patron of the discredited Quilliam Foundation has cast many shadows on her well wishing stance.
Another baffling activity Jemima Khan has been at the centre of is the vocal and financial support she provided for Wiki leaks founder Julian Assange.
Gordon Duff from the respected Veterans Today website first highlighted how Wiki leaks was an Israeli intelligence operation, he wrote: “It only took Zbigniew Brzezinski Washington’s “establishment” foreign policy expert, a “New York minute” to spot Wiki leaks as an intelligence operation.
Wiki leaks Julian Assange’s lawyer Mark Stephens is connected to the Rothschild Family who control the worlds banking system and are behind the formation of Israel. The house where Assange was “imprisoned” is owned by Vaughan Smith, the owner of Frontline Trust, a news organization that seeks to influence TV journalists. Frontline is funded by George Soros’ organization, Open Society Institute; George Soros is intimately intertwined with the Rothschild’s and is a former business partner of Jemima’s father James Goldsmith.
Jemima says the reason she supported Assange was because she believes in freedom of information and because she has
“…. personal interest in the revelations about Pakistan…”
According to General Hamid Gul, former Director General of ISI the Wikileaks revelations regarding Pakistan only harmed the country:
“The report has not said a word about Israel, nor does it give any disadvantage to US in the implementation of policies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran and other Muslim countries, which have been particularly targeted.”
In the meantime Mr. Khan has just picked out Scottish millionaire Mr. Azeem Ibrahim to be his special adviser, Mr. Ibrahim’s specialty is that he “He has worked on taskforces set up by former UK prime minister Gordon Brown, advised the Turkish Government and has worked with various American bodies including the Pentagon, the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security”
This is the same Department of Homeland Security where Zionists hold key positions and where its second secretary Michael Chertoff was the main person to block any investigation of hundreds of Mossad spies detained in connection with the attacks on 9/11, he also started a witch hunt against Muslims, incarcerating over a 1000 innocents without any evidence, in an effort to take the attention off the Israelis spy ring.
As the country nears election time and opposition parties use every dirty trick against each other, no matter who wins, one fact is clear Israel’s secret war within Pakistan will continue, to not only manipulate and control the youth but to destabilize and denuclearize the country.
“The case against Clevinger was open and shut. The only thing missing was something to charge him with.”
- Catch 22, Joseph Heller
Facebook – Upside down
On May 18, the Nasdaq IPO of Facebook made headlines around the world. The IPO price of its share was $38; yet, at the trade opening time it was traded at $42.43, it jumped to $43, and then dropped to the starting point of $38. The underwriters supported the stock at this level and caused it to rally back to $41.50. However, by the end of the day, the stock was barely above $38. At this price, Facebook’s market capitalization is around $81 billion. It was the third-highest IPO-day valuation in history, behind only the $19.7 billion raised by Visa in March 2008 and the $18.1 billion raised by General Motors in November 2010. More than 80 million shares changed hands in the first 30 seconds of trading. By the end of the day, around 567 million shares had changed hands. This set a new volume record for IPOs; the previous one was held by General Motors. These numbers are very impressive; however, there are clear hints that we have seen a very clumsy operation by Mark Zuckerberg; it seems he isn’t exactly what he claims to be.
One way of understanding Facebook IPO is as an hysterical success, after all, Facebook barely makes any profits from its customers. Yet, most traders do not react directly to economic data; they speak about “support levels” and “expectations.” A company featuring bad economic data may still see its stock rise if there is a positive sentiment attached to it. Other way of analyzing Facebook’s IPO, is as a colossal failure. The underwriters were forced to support the stock during the trade, and at the end of the day it was barely over its base level. This creates a bad aura around this share that many expected to become the next Superman of Nasdaq. Business Insider posted a poll asking readers where they thought the $38 stock would be by the end of Friday. In the morning of the IPO day, 15% said under $35. The biggest cluster of respondents said somewhere between $40 and 55. 10% predicted the stock would reach over $90 a share. Facebook, ended the day at its starting price, below $40. Most investors will analyze this as disappointing, and would probably shun this new white-elephant. The company doesn’t sell enough, and the market sentiment towards it is not good. Yet, that is not all. There are also serious market reasons for this. Many are of the opinion that comprehensive personal databases as Facebook cannot succeed in the long term. People need privacy. Instead, it is predicted that specialized social media platforms will rise. For example, as described in The Cross of Bethlehem II: Back in Bethlehem, writing the book wouldn’t have been possible without my use of such specialized social media as a safe data storage, hiding everything in plain sight. If this tendency will continue, Facebook is expected to decline in a few years.
Considering the mechanics behind market sentiments and how these polls are done, the failure of Facebook is astonishing. Most of the abovementioned polls, and certainly the public sentiment, are driven by the media. One of the groups involved in the early analysis of the IPO was Meltwater; their digital media intelligence platform scans over 162,000 online publications worldwide in real time. I mention here their data, because they made public an important aspect of the raw data they used. Meltwater claims that there have been over 13,570 online articles of Facebook’s IPO in the 30 days that preceded the event in the US press alone. This is an astonishing number, matching the combined data for the last three large internet IPOs (LinkedIn, Zynga, and Groupon). Over 68% of the coverage was positive while over 31% was is negative. Despite this positive sentiment, the actual result of the trading was almost neutral. One can summarize that American mainstream press supported Facebook and failed in its assessment of the IPO. Was this failure an attempt to drive the market in its favor by Facebook?
If that was so, then Zuckerberg proved his failure to understand the tool he has under his hands. A hint to this was provided by the Wall Street Journal, which recently claimed that more and more hedge funds are using social media insights to build trading strategies. In other words, Facebook has the tool needed to catapult its own IPO into success; instead it apparently attempted to manipulate mainstream media. What was the Wall Street Journal referring to? The prestigious journal used the word “insight” as a euphemism for what is better described as “social media aggregation company.” One of these companies is Gnip, from Boulder, Colorado. They have been dubbed “Grand Central Station for the Social Web,” which is an excellent metaphor. They collect the data passing through open social media platforms (like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blog sites and many others) and analyze it. It goes down to the level of tracking single usernames. Beyond the obvious surveillance value of their activity, they can provide market trends. In other words, they can tell you what Facebook users think of the Facebook IPO. This data is provided to companies like hedge funds, which can base their investing strategies on these reports. If I am aware of this, then also the financial assessors of Mark Zuckerberg are. Facebook could have used its power—in several ways, which I won’t analyze here—to manipulate the sentiment of its users towards the issue and henceforth, the evaluation of his company by the sharpest financial sharks in the market. In other words, Facebook could have created using an array of innocent tactics a positive sentiment towards itself and influenced in such a way the market behavior in the IPO day. Instead, Zuckerberg was busy issuing pretty pictures of himself to the media.
This new image of Zuckerberg as an unprofessional toddler is a bombshell. Over the years, Mr. Zuckerberg has developed an image of a slick thief, to the extent that I have asked in the past: Is Zuckerberg Mossad? The life story of Mark Zuckerberg supports such a claim. He was born into a Jewish family; his compromise to Judaism was so significant that he had a Bar Mitzvah at the age of 13. Don’t laugh at this; this isn’t just a familiar event with good food. A Bar Mitzvah is the formal acceptance of Judaism by those born into Jewish families. It isn’t a familiar obligation, but an act of choice. Having grown up in a Communist Kibbutz, I must tell that only a minority of its kids chose to participate in such a questionable event. Yet, our Mark was happy to participate. That means Mark Zuckerberg was in an excellent position to become a formal “sayan” of the Mossad. Former Mossad officer Victor Ostrovsky, in his book By Way of Deception, described the issue of worldwide Jewish-Israeli espionage extensively. The Mossad uses “sayanim,” (“helpers” in Hebrew) or local Jews living in foreign countries as its organizational base. Did Zuckerberg become one? Let’s see. He entered Harvard, and shortly after violated its computers, stealing an important database. He belonged to Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish fraternity. Then, Harvard students Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, and Divya Narendra accused Zuckerberg of intentionally making them believe he would help them build a social network called HarvardConnection.com (later called ConnectU); in such a way, Mark Zuckerberg stole the technology that allowed him to build Facebook. One could claim that Mossad wanted to get formal access HarvardConnection.com technology. It is useful for monitoring and controlling social networks. Spotting Zuckerberg as a cooperative individual wasn’t hard. Giving him an informal tip on how to break into Harvard’s computers was even easier. Explaining him how to trick out the technology from Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss, and Divya Narendra— none of them would have cooperated with Mossad—was also easy. Afterwards, the marketing of Facebook against other social media networks was easy due to the Harvard connection, everybody wanted to share the splendor of this Ivy-League establishment. Facts speak for themselves: Zuckerberg stole technology in a method not unknown to Mossad.
He belongs to the most faithful recruitment base of that organization. Probably we will never know for sure the exact details.
Zuckerberg public statements support this conjecture. He has an odd attitude towards freedom. On September 2010, he gave an interview to the Oprah Winfrey Show. Among other things he suggested not to talk about politics or religion. “Politics” can be defined as “the peaceful solution of conflicts.” The only alternative to politics is violence and war. Religion defines ones attitude toward God and his fellow humans. As such religion is the base for our politics. There is no other choice for each one of us to be actively involved in both. Any other claim takes us straight into the criminal hands of the Big Brother; every year would become 1984. Zuckerberg may not be the Big Brother, but he is family. I care very little about Mark Zuckerberg’s formal statistics; he was born—at least in spirit—in 1984.
Once Mossad got access to the raw data, it cared very little about what Facebook did. Its interest is to let the patsy organization to work free, for as long as it cooperates with the Mossad reasonable and humble needs to violate our privacy. Yet, in two cases, Facebook backfired. Google, Facebook and Twitter played a key role in the ousting of their favorite yes-man in the Middle East: Hosni Mubarak, the Last Pharaoh of Egypt. A boomerang hit the West. The Israeli support of Mubarak was known to the protesters. Then, it backfired yesterday, when a sloppy Zuckerberg—unable of anything but stealing—ruined the company’s IPO. This failure may cost Mossad its new toy. Zuckerberg’s arrogance led him to a very Jewish attitude: “it will be OK,” meaning there is no need to make efforts. Assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin used to speak against this attitude. These key events show us that security services are failing to understand the rapid technological development we are experiencing. Our multi-faceted reality has opened way to new ways of information interactions that in a strange way are providing us with strong defenses against our institutional violators. There is hope that soon we will escape this shady version of “1984” we are trapped in. Thank you, Mark!
The author of Philosemitism and Brutality, Andrew Hamilton, expresses some strong views positing a sado-masochistic relationship between the Jewish culture and the “whites” in America. Unlike others who describe gentiles as the dominated majority who lost the competition to a tribal community endowed with better networking, superior drive, intelligence a.s.o., Hamilton thinks the white gentiles actually admire and adore the Jews (as the masochist who loves his sadist) for their brutality, superior to theirs. This may not apply to the whole mass of white gentiles but if it does obtain among the those in the upper echelons (who arrived where they are because of their own brutality and greed) it is sufficient to enhance the success of Jewish power.
So, Jewish culture is like any other, only… more so?
(* Editors note N.B.> Please note Andrew Hamilton’s article makes some interesting points but goes too far in collectively blaming all Jews. Some Jews certainly do succumb to this kind of brutality but he could have been more nuanced in his analysis. Having said that, it is not without merit. )
Gentiles, all Gentiles (well, almost all), love the Jews. More than that, they worship them. Why?
There are many reasons, but one is Jews’ innate brutality.
As Sigmund Freud, following French psychologist Gustave Le Bon, wrote in Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego (1922), a group “respects force,” and “What it demands of its heroes is strength or even violence.It wants to be ruled and oppressed and to fear its masters.”
What are a few things virtually synonymous with Jews?
Communism and the murder of tens of millions in Russia and Eastern Europe, “unconditional surrender,” the Morgenthau Plan, the development of the A-bomb to destroy Central Europe, terrorism, Zionism, Irgun, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), Mossad, contemporary war-making, endless foreign intervention and “revolutions from above,” the “Russian” and Jewish mafias, “American” mobsters like Dutch Schultz, Louis “Lepke” Buchalter, and Meyer Lansky, Murder, Inc., the ADL, SPLC, JDL and JDO, AIPAC, the US Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI), disgusting decades-long persecutions of Ernst Zündel, John Demjanjuk, and dozens of other innocent people, assassination, torture, political correctness, “hate speech” and “hate crime” laws, replacement migration, and arbitrary imprisonment or reputational and financial ruin for exercising one’s freedom of speech or thought.
Strip away the Persecution Myth, the preposterous fairy tale of the “poor, persecuted Jew,” and one is left with Jews as they really are: wealthy, powerful, domineering, self-centered, greedy, lying, cruel, indifferent to the suffering and rights of others, socially, educationally, financially, politically, and ethnically advantaged, racist, top dog, intolerant, violent, mass murdering, genocidal.
Jews are the Bully writ large, quasi-psychotic, not right in the head. (One of their famous gangsters was nicknamed “Bugsy” for that reason.) Paradoxically, this fundamental disconnect from reality enhances rather than detracts from their power.
Jewish behavior is not constrained by internal morality or external laws. And no de facto countervailing power exists.
When present in sufficient numbers, and their power becomes consolidated, Jews distort both state and culture.
The state becomes little more than a Jewish instrument or tool, a criminal enterprise vested with the veneer of authority. The governments of the world, including transnational and international organizations, are thereby delegitimized. Force and power supplant organic forms of authority.
In the Jewish-Gentile dynamic, Jews represent the masculine principle, whites the feminine, Jews the brutal sadists, whites the adoring masochists. The greater the psychological, emotional, and physical abuse the victims suffer, the more admiring they become. And it is no false adoration.
Whites are demure, available coquettes in the presence of the psychologically commanding Jew.
Fear of the Jews
Closely related to the same Jewish evil is a diametrically opposite response: “fear of the Jews.” Some whites fail to challenge Jewish attacks upon their race, culture, religion, customs, laws, liberties, or persons not because they love Jews, but because they fear them.
Such fear is well-grounded.
Therefore, one might mistakenly imagine that, in general, fear motivates professions and acts of devotion, while secretly abhorrence trumps fealty.
But it seems likely that genuine love for and worship of Jews is a much greater contributor to Jewish success and power than fear.
Still, there remains the issue of widespread ignorance due to lies and censorship. Most whites are probably completely unaware of the truth about Jews.
If they knew it, would they hate them?
Jews assume so. That’s one reason rigid censorship goes hand-in-hand with Jewish power. (Totalitarianism is also innate to them.)
But simply because Jews are convinced the truth would harm them does not make it so. Jews entertain many crackpot notions. Conceivably, currently clueless whites could respond to the truth with heightened adoration.
Yet Jews think not. Perhaps they’re right. At any rate, censorship has become obligatory. It’s good for the Jews!
Living in America is becoming very difficult for anyone with a moral conscience, a sense of justice, or a lick of intelligence. –Paul Craig Roberts
“People without valid information are helpless, and that is where Western peoples are,” writes Paul Craig Roberts.
“The new tyranny is arising in the West, not in Russia and China. The danger to humanity is in the nuclear button briefcase in the Oval Office and in the brainwashed and militant Amerikan (sic) population, the most totally disinformed and ignorant people on earth.”
It’s well-worth following what Roberts has to say. He’s one of the most informed thinkers and writers in America.
Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury during President Reagan’s first term. He authored eight books and was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. His numerous academic appointments testify to his scholarship.
His experience and breadth of research provide the broad perspectives found in his articles. Roberts is a no-holds-barred writer.
He’s not a partisan writer. “If I had time to research my writings over the past 30 years, I could find examples of partisan articles in behalf of Republicans and against Democrats. However, political partisanship is not the corpus of my writings.”
Roberts has been a severe critic of the media, though he has contributed to the mainstream media like the Wall Street Journal.
He says, “Anyone who depends on print, TV, or right-wing talk radio media is totally misinformed. The Bush administration has achieved a de facto Ministry of Propaganda.”
Commenting on “Americans who rely on the totally corrupt corporate media have no idea what is happening anywhere on earth, much less at home.”
Focusing on Israel, Roberts ridicules the myth that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.
“In truth, Israel is a fascist state, one that has been in violation of international law and Christian morality during the entirety of its existence. Yet, in America Israel is a hallowed icon,” he observes.
”Like Bush, Cheney, and Obama, millions of American ‘Christians’ worship Israel and believe it is ‘God’s calling’ for Americans to die for Israel,” Roberts adds.
“Washington cannot exist without conflict. Now that the ‘Muslim threat’ is wearing thin, Washington is stirring up a conflict with China,” argues Roberts.
“China will be presented by Washington and its prostitute media, especially the New York Times, Washington Post, and Murdoch’s collection of whores, as the rising threat to America,” Roberts predicts.
“The US government relies on secret evidence in its cases against alleged terrorists, claiming that national security would be threatened if the evidence were revealed. This is abject nonsense,” concludes Roberts.
“To the contrary, not presenting evidence jeopardizes the security of each and every one of us. Once the government can convict defendants on the basis of secret evidence, even the concept of a fair trial will disappear.”
Roberts challenges mainstream dogma about 9/11:
Having bought the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory, Americans just want someone to pay. They don’t care who as long as someone pays.
“No more humiliating affront has ever been suffered by a major power than the US suffered on 9/11,” Roberts recalls.
”Yet, absolutely no one, not even some lowly traffic controller, was scapegoated and held accountable for what is considered to be the most extraordinarily successful terrorist attack in human history, an attack so successful that it implies total negligence…”
Occasionally intelligent, well-founded but unpopular views can be found on the internet. Those who have missed Paul Craig Roberts should enjoy the benefit of an awakening, rising above the mindless masses through his wisdom.
“I am Muhammad Ali,
a free name –
it means beloved of God –
and I insist people use it
when people speak to me
and of me.”