Remember Palestine-06-16-2012 from Press TV with Lauren Booth featuring Gilad Atzmon.
As convoys and flotillas are being increasingly blocked from entering Palestine, activists look increasingly to the Boycott Movement as a way to pressure Israel. Most recently, the Co-operative Group decided to no longer engage with any supplier of produce known to be sourcing from the Israeli settlements. This was a great achievement for activists who have campaigned for this kind of boycott for years in the face of government’s refusal to act in compliance with international human rights norms.
This month campaigns were also held against the Habima Theatre Company performance as part of the Globe’s Shakespeare festival. This boycott was called in response to the Palestinian call to boycott all Israeli cultural institutions which “continue to serve the purposes of the Israeli colonial and apartheid regime”. The protest at Habima’s performance was covered by most of the UK’s major news outlets drawing attention to Israel’s human rights violations.
by Lawrence Britt Spring 2003
Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism (“Fascism Anyone?,” Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine’s policy.
The 14 characteristics are:
- Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
- Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
- Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc
- Supremacy of the Military
Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
- Rampant Sexism
The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.
- Controlled Mass Media
Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
- Obsession with National Security
Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
- Religion and Government are Intertwined
Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
- Corporate Power is Protected
The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
- Labor Power is Suppressed
Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .
- Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.
- Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations
- Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
- Fraudulent Elections
Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
Copyright © 2003 Free Inquiry magazine
Reprinted for Fair Use Only.
This article was based upon the article “The Hallmarks of Fascist Regime” by Skip Stone, at www.hippy.com/php/article-226.html.
Employing legalistic chicanery, blatant deceit and contemptible conspiracies, the remnants of the Mubarak regime seem hell-bent on aborting the Egyptian revolution.
On Thursday, 14 June, the so-called Constitutional Court, an entity that was utterly silent during 30 years of corruption, tyranny and repression under the previous regime, issued a hasty decision, dissolving the People’s Assembly or Parliament.
This parliament was elected only three months ago in perfectly transparent elections observed by the entire world and supervised by the Egyptian judicial system. None of the judges then questioned the legality and transparency of the elections. They all boasted about the democratic credentials of the ruling junta, saying that Egypt was entering a new era of human rights, political freedoms and civil liberties.
With the last round of parliamentary polls, it became clear that the Islamists were the winners. This infuriated the “Mubarak party” which began ranting and raving about “an Islamist takeover of Egypt” and the “monopoly of the Ikhwan” over the Egyptian scene.
Such disgusting canards and vociferous accusations were repeated so often that one would get the impression that the Islamist arrogated, not earned, their electoral victories.
Some of the small leftist and Nasserist parties went beyond the pale of decency and common sense in vilifying the Islamists for winning “more seats than they should” as if the Islamists were supposed to ask the voters to vote for them sparingly or parsimoniously.!!!
The discourse employed by the leftists and pseudo liberals in the aftermath of the parliamentary elections was so mendacious, so malicious, so repulsive and above all markedly preposterous that it portrayed the Islamists as “hijackers or stealers of the people’s will.” The utter depravity of these so-called “democratic forces” reached such a point that a casual listener to these hypocrites’ lies and vindictive falsification of the facts would think that the real problem lies with the Ikhwan, not with Zionist Mubarak regime.
More to the point, the de facto rejection of the democratic process by these pseudo liberals and pseudo-democrats underscore their hypocrisy and despotic impulses. In the final analysis, feeling gleeful and going into a state of ecstasy over the dissolution of a democratically-elected parliament, which exhausted the poor country and cost her hundreds of millions of dollars, shows the utter falsehood of their democratic claims.
I can’t understand what could justify the dissolution of a democratically-elected parliament only a few weeks after was elected? Indeed, if there were true legal gaps rendering the parliament unconstitutional as the mouthpieces of the regime keep parroting, such gaps should have been determined and tackled from the very inception, given the fact that the elections were held under the supervision of the justice system from A to Z.
However, the fact that the court said nothing and did nothing until the eve of the presidential elections suggests more than a foul play.
More to the point, one would wonder if the Constitutional court would have dissolved the parliament had secularist and liberal forces won the elections. The answer is left to each and everyone of us according to his or her honesty.
In every democratic country under the sun, the elected representatives of the people have the right to write the constitution or select a body of experts to do the job. However, according to Mubarak’s shipyard dogs, this right must be withdrawn from the elected representatives and given to losers that were ejected by the masses.
There is no doubt that the dissolution of the parliament represents a blatant rape of the will the Egyptian people by the military establishment along with the remnants of the judicial establishment, a body that was always at Mubarak’s beck and call.
Hence, it is imperative that the current judicial establishment be subjected to a process of thorough purification lest that establishment continues conniving and colluding with the tyrannical military establishment in order to reproduce the Mubarak regime and take Egypt back to American-Zionist bondage.
To put it simply and straightforwardly, the current judicial establishment can’t be entrusted or relied upon to uphold justice in Egypt.
Two weeks ago, the Egyptian justice system acquitted nearly all the pillars of the previous regime, including hundreds of murderers, thieves, and conspirers.
True, Mubarak and his interior minister Habib al-Adly were sentenced to life imprisonment, probably under public pressure.
But what is the fate of the murderers of more than 850 Egyptian protesters? Who killed them? Did the killers come from Mars or another galaxy? And why is it that the burden of proof lies with the victims’ families and lawyers, not the state.
Indeed, what is the state’s raison d’être if not to protect the lives of its citizens and uphold justice? The state can’t just tell the families of the victims, “sorry, we don’t know who killed your loved ones, and may God’s mercy be bestowed on them.” The state is guilty of breach of trust.
I don’t know how the Egyptian scene will evolve following the presidential elections now underway. Will the notorious Constitutional Court declare these elections null and void if the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate Muhammed Mursi wins the polls?
Everything is possible and nothing can be taken for granted, because the orphans of Mubarak are alive and kicking and will not cease their treacherous and treasonous acts unless they are eliminated. But nothing other than the continuation and intensification of the revolution will guarantee their elimination.
Egypt is going through a crucial and difficult period. May God help Egypt.
Jihan Hafiz reports thousands of Egyptians hit the streets rejecting the disbanding of Parliament, as the Egyptian military is moving towards full dictatorship
I dislike sport a great deal but I thought this is not really a sport story. It is however a great example of cultural boycott of Israel, from some very enthusiastic Palestine activists, involving “shouting” and disruption of their game. The Habima Theatre protestors could have done with some help from these guys and gals, rather than their silent protest and hand-sewn banners. This is the kind of thing we want more of…
Happily this is not just the first protest at a sporting event in the UK, another is planned for June 20th in Wales.
The gathering on June 20 will see a huge protest against Israel regime’s apartheid, based on which the regime imprisons Palestinian athletes without charge and at the same time sends its own athletes to international events to win medals.
Between 5pm to 6.30pm, outside Wrexham Stadium; supporters of human rights will come from all over Britain to protest that the Israeli Women’s football teams are allowed to play Wales in the Women’s European Championship qualifiers.
Currently, Mahmoud Sarsak, a member of the Palestinian national football team is in the 88th day of a hunger strike against his imprisonment without charge or trial since July 2009, when he was abducted while on the way to play in a match.
— Anna Andersson (@annaander) June 17, 2012
Watch the following animated cartoon concerning the collapse of the “American dream.” You’ll notice that at no point in its entire half-hour run time is there any mention of “Jews” or “AIPAC” or “Israel”—nor about the subservience to the Jewish state exhibited by our leaders in Washington, nor the wars or financial ruin brought upon us by this subservient, satellite alliance. BUT—the animation does give us a rather interesting depiction of the international bankers…as snakes with red shields.
In German, the words “red shield” translate to rot Schild, or Rothschild. Moreover, there can be no doubt the Jewish Rothschild family is the one being referred to, for the history of the Battle of Waterloo in 1815—as related at about 15 minutes into the video—is clearly the history of the Rothschild family. A Jewish family whose members are depicted as snakes. Is the cartoon therefore anti-Semitic? Or is it merely making a truthful observation?
What we have here is a video created by an obvious “non-anti-Semite,” but which at the same time possesses, shall we say, certain “anti-Semitic connotations” in its depiction of Jewish bankers as snakes. The lesson to be drawn would therefore be that even if you’re not an anti-Semite, or if you’re at any rate making a concerted effort to avoid sounding like one, “anti-Semitism” nonetheless is completely unavoidable if you’re to say anything of substance about the world we live in. That seems to be the nature of reality these days.
I mention all this because next year, 2013, will mark the 100th anniversary of the passage of the Federal Reserve Act. Presumably there will be some kind of protest. Ideally, this would be a massive demonstration outside the main Federal Reserve in Washington, with related protests at each of the 12 Federal Reserve regional banks. This could easily become a nationwide movement, and one thing it has going for it is that whether you’re a Tea Party-ist on the Right, or an antiwar activist on the Left, presumably we could all agree that the bankers have too much power and the Fed ought to be ended. Yet so far, at least as of now, there doesn’t seem to be much on the Web about a protest or even about the anniversary at all. On a Ron Paul site here you can find a brief acknowledgement that the anniversary is approaching, likewise here, or go here and here and read about the 100th anniversary of the Jekyll Island meeting (an anniversary that actually occurred two years ago). But that’s largely it, other than, of course, mentions by the Federal Reserve itself (which seem to be stated in a deliberately low key manner).
The Federal Reserve was created by act of Congress on December 23, 1913, so there’s plenty of time yet to organize something. But a key question, as the date approaches and people plan events, is to what extent organizers will feel themselves able to freely discuss the “anti-Semitic” aspects of the issue that could and should be addressed. My guess is there will be a huge reticence in this regard, but the fact is the Federal Reserve is Jewish at its very core. The Rothschild family was intimately involved in establishing the Fed, mainly through the efforts of its U.S. agents, Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg, both of whom were connected to the Kuhn, Loeb, and Co. investment bank. Here is what I wrote about the Fed in an article I posted roughly a year ago:
Since its creation in 1913, the Federal Reserve has had 14 chairmen, five of whom have been Jewish, including Charles S. Hamlin, the very first Fed chairman, and Ben Bernanke, who holds the position today. This means slightly more than a third of all the chairmen have been Jewish. To put that into perspective, Jews make up roughly 2.2 percent of the U.S. population, while Asians, African-Americans and Hispanics/Latinos together comprise approximately 34.5 percent. There has never been a single Hispanic, African-American, or Asian-American Fed chairman. Last year, Obama appointed three new members to the Fed’s Board of Governors: Janet Yellen, Sarah Bloom Raskin, and Peter Diamond. Though such things are difficult to verify, it has been claimed that all three are Jewish. Yellen succeeded Donald Kohn as vice-chairman of the board.
So as I say, an “End-the-Fed” protest is very much in order, and of course such a protest could perhaps use a logo. The graphic you see at the top of this post is one I did myself. It’s a humble offering, and without a doubt better artists than I could improve upon the design, but if you so desire, feel free to copy and make use of it.
One thousand Brits were carefully selected by “People in power” to be honoured with gongs, merits and medals from the Queen. One woman on BBC Radio 2 eplained what it was like when she got her award from the Queen today.
At first when I got it I was terrified, the the envelope was so strange & frightening, but when I opened it up I realised it was an honour”
- T. S. Ashton, economic historian, Emeritus Professor of Economic History, University of London, 1957 New Year Honours
- Frank Auerbach, artist (in 2003)
- Norman H. Baynes, historian, Professor Emeritus of Byzantine History, University of London, 1951 Birthday Honours
- Alan Bennett, playwright (in 1996; had previously declined appointment as CBE in 1988)
- Arnold Bennett, novelist
- David Bowie, musician (in 2003)
- Lester Brain, aviator and airline executive (in late 1960s; later accepted appointment as an Officer of the Order of Australia in 1979)
- Francis Crick, physicist and Nobel Prize winner
- George Davies, declined offer from Prime Minister Gordon Brown
- Paul Dirac, Nobel Prize winner for physics in 1933, declined a knighthood in 1953 but accepted the OM in 1973.,
- Lionel Elvin, Principal, Ruskin College Oxford, Director of Institute of Education, University of London.
- Michael Faraday, scientist
- Harry Ferguson, businessman, engineer and inventor from Ulster
- Albert Finney, actor (in 2000, had previously declined appointment as CBE in 1980)
- E. M. Forster, author and essayist (in 1949; later accepted appointment as CH in 1953)
- Michael Frayn, FRSL, dramatist (in 2003; had previously declined appointment as CBE in 1989)
- John Galsworthy, playwright and novelist
- Graham Greene, novelist
- Calouste Gulbenkian, philanthropist, Hon KBE, 1951 New Year Honours
- Stanford G. Haughton, sound recordist (musician), 1952 New Year Honours
- Stephen Hawking, scientist
- Patrick Heron, artist, declined award of Knight Bachelor 1980s in protest at government policy on Art education.
- Keith Hill, Labour MP (2010 Dissolution Honours)
- David Hockney, CH, RA, artist (in 1990; accepted appointment as CH in 1997, and OM in 2012)
- Charles Holden, architect, declined twice, in 1944 and 1951.
- Trevor Howard, stage/film actor (in 1982)
- Aldous Huxley, author (in 1959)
- Eli Lobel, 1955 New Year Honours
- L. S. Lowry, artist (in 1968; had previously declined appointment as OBE in 1955 and CBE in 1961; later declined appointment as CH in 1972 and 1976; holds the record for the most honours declined)
- Humphrey Lytellton, jazz musician, broadcastor and author.
- Kingsley Martin journalist in 1965
- Malcolm McDowell, actor in 1993
- John Loudon McAdam, Scottish road builder
- Neil MacGregor, Director of the British Museum (in 1999); however, in 2010 he accepted appointment to the Order of Merit, which is in the personal gift of the British monarch
- James Meade, economist, 1969 New Years Honours
- Norman Miscampbell, Conservative MP (in 1989 Obituary The Guardian 2007)
- Henry Moore, sculptor, declined a knighthood in 1951, but accepted the Companion of Honour in 1955 and the Order of Merit in 1963.
- Stanley Morison, 1953 Coronation and Birthday Honours (later declined offer of CBE)
- Robert Morley, actor, 1975 Birthday Honours
- A.G.Norman biochemist (in 1969)
- Frank Pick, chief executive of London Transport (also declined a peerage).
- William Pember Reeves, New Zealand statesman, declined knighthood three times, including GCMG[
- J.B. Priestley, novelist and playwright.
- George Bernard Shaw, playwright and critic; also declined OM
- Paul Scofield, actor
- Alastair Sim, actor, declined a knighthood as did his father
- Quentin Skinner, historian (in 1996).
- Ralph Vaughan Williams composer
- Steven Watson historian Principal St Andrews University (in 1966)
Appointment to the Order of Merit
- A. E. Housman, poet and classical scholar (in 1929)
- George Bernard Shaw, playwright, critic, and polemicist (in 1946; Shaw replied that “merit” in authorship could only be determined by the posthumous verdict of history). Shaw had also wanted to decline a Nobel Prize for literature in 1925, but accepted it at his wife’s behest as honouring Ireland. He did reject the monetary award, requesting it be used to finance translation of Swedish books into English.
Appointment as a Companion of Honour (CH)
- Francis Bacon, Irish artist (in 1977; had previously declined appointment as CBE in 1960)
- Robert Graves, poet and novelist (in 1984; had previously declined appointment as CBE in 1957)
- L. S. Lowry RA, artist (in 1972 and 1976; had previously declined appointment as OBE in 1955 and CBE in 1961 and a knighthood in 1968; holds the record for the most honours declined)
- Philip Noel-Baker, former Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations, 1965 New Year Honours(accepted a life peerage in 1977)
- J. B. Priestley, declined in 1969.
Appointment to the Order of the Bath
As Knight Companion
- Admiral George Cranfield Berkeley in 1812, expecting a peerage; he settled for the KB in 1813, which was converted to a GCB in 1815.
- Colonel Allday V. Kerrison, 1955 New Year Honours
- Bernard O’Brien, scientist, 1956 New Years Honours
Appointment to the Royal Victorian Order
As a Commander
- Craig Murray, former United Kingdom Ambassador to Uzbekistan (had previously declined appointments as LVO and OBE