Prisoners of Zion: Administrative Detention

Israeli interrogators force Palestinian female detainee to remove her Hijab
[ 16/10/2008 – 10:06 AM ]

RAMALLAH, (PIC)– The Israeli occupation interrogators have forced Palestinian female detainee Sana Salah of Bethlehem city to remove her headscarf (Hijab) during interrogation sessions at the Maskobeyya detention center in occupied Jerusalem.
Salah revealed her experience to lawyer of the Palestinian prisoner club who visited her Wednesday in jail where she also added that six Israeli investigators were questioning her for 8 continuous hours with her hands and feet chained.
She also added that the Zionist officers beat and slapped her on the face in addition to uttering insults.
“I stayed in Maskobeyya detention for one month and a half without being given a change of clothes for the first 20 days”, Salah affirmed, adding she suffers from chest pains, and weakness in the right eye.
For her part, Palestinian lady legislator MP Muna Mansour of Hamas’s parliamentary bloc urged the PA agencies and institutions to seriously work for the release of all Palestinian female captives in Israeli jails.
Mansour’s remarks came as she paid a visit to houses of a number of Palestinian female captives in Ramallah city as a sign of solidarity with the female captives and their families.


Two Palestinian girls detained in Israel without trial for months

By Fadi Eyadat
On the night of June 5, someone knocked on the door of the Salah house in Khader, near Bethlehem. Had it not been 2 A.M., nobody in the family would even have been suspicious. Nevertheless, said Siham Salah, her eldest daughter, Salwa, opened the door.

“Soldiers and a [Shin Bet security service] officer entered,” Siham related. “They sat down calmly and began to ask questions about members of the household. They asked how many children we had and about the fact that there are problems in our neighborhood. Suddenly, they went outside, brought in female soldiers and took my daughter.

“I told the officer she’s a girl, all of 16, studying for her matriculation exams, and that she never had any involvement in politics or belonged to any organization. He ignored me. I began to scream; Salwa began to cry and shouted at me: ‘Mother, don’t let them take me!’ But the soldiers shut me into an inside room and kidnapped her.”

Only two months later did Siham finally see her daughter again, in the Damoun Prison near Haifa. There, she discovered that her 16-year-old cousin Sara had also been arrested. Both girls were being held in administrative detention, or detention without trial.

Since then, four months have gone by. Last week, the girls’ detentions were extended by another three months. But the Salah family still does not even know why their daughter was arrested, and all their efforts to find out have been in vain.

According to attorney Sahar Francis, who is representing both girls, the security services “claim they are dangerous, based on classified information. We tried in court to ask the prosecutor the nature of their ‘dangerousness’: Did they act alone? What was their role? But we didn’t receive any answers. And other than an initial interrogation at the time they were arrested, neither has been questioned.”

Altogether, some 600 Palestinians are in administrative detention in Israel, including about 15 minors who do not even know why they are being detained.

Some 100 people organized by the Coalition of Women for Peace protested Wednesday opposite the prison to demand that Salwa and Sara be released. “We oppose the use of administrative detention, because it is undemocratic,” said Adi Dagan, one of the demonstration’s organizers. “It is part of the occupation and oppression of the Palestinian people. And we’re talking about two schoolgirls. No one even knows why they are being held in jail.”

The Re’ut-Sadaka youth movement has collected some 500 signatures, mostly from other youths, on a petition demanding that the girls either be indicted or released.

Siham Salah said that the first time she saw her daughter in jail, “she was in a difficult emotional state. She cried and asked us to get her out of there. She’s a baby, a girl who lived from school to home and back again. That very day [of her arrest], she had signed up for matriculation prep classes in English and math. Today, when I see the girls of her class going to school, I burst out crying.”

Not One Cent For Gaza: "Hail Habila"

It seems the Palestinian leader is overseeing the brutal siege of his own people in Gaza without a care or thought for them.

“They are living a hand-to-mouth existence and innocent men, women and children are dying in this collective punishment because they are being denied vital medicines and access to the outside world, but their support of Hamas is growing by the day. I’ve seen it with my own eyes”

By Yvonne Ridley

JUST when you think the Zionist leaders have peaked in arrogance and the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has peaked in ignorance, a new scheme comes along that is almost beyond belief, prompting me to wonder if they are all taking crack cocaine.

Apparently Defence Minister Ehud Barak and the Pharonic Mubarak opened serious discussions about the deployment of an Arab force in the Gaza Strip consisting largely of Egyptian and some Saudi troops.

Apparently the two said they would eventually like to expand the deployment of Arab and international forces to the West Bank as well, with those troops consisting largely of Jordanian forces, according to the Israeli plan.

The reason for this nonsense? Well I believe it is because Hamas, the democratically elected government (certainly in Gaza) is doing such a good job of maintaining law and order and are growing in popularity with ordinary Palestinians that their continued rise is viewed as a huge threat … not just to the Zionist interlopers but to the rest of the leadership in the Arab world.

Gaza is the world’s largest open air prison and its infrastructure, emergency services and day to day operations have been crippled by the brutal Israeli-led siege.

Yet despite this, Hamas – since it kicked out the corrupt Fatah fat cats last year – has managed to try and hold things together for its 1.5m citizens on the Gaza Strip.

They are living a hand-to-mouth existence and innocent men, women and children are dying in this collective punishment because they are being denied vital medicines and access to the outside world, but their support of Hamas is growing by the day. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and so, unlike most of the outside politicians including the Quartet’s Peace Envoy Tony Blair, I am coming from a point of knowledge.
I, along with more than 40 other international peace activists, went to Gaza recently by boat to smash the seaborne part of the siege, and we saw for ourselves the dreadful situation imposed on the Gazans.

But I was also able to wander and move around freely and discovered Gaza to be among one of the safest cities in the world … certainly much more safe than the streets of London or New York. Crime is down more than 80 per cent since Hamas police took over – the statistics are available.

One day myself and film-maker Aki Nawaz wandered down on to the beach and took part in a lively, political discussion with ordinary Palestiniansand some of them made it clear they did not like or support Hamas. But what we did was taken part in a full and frank discussion and such freedoms of speech are not allowed or encouraged in the rest of the Arab world.

The fact is, there is so much irrational hatred for Hamas from Israel, America and Europe that the politicians just refuse to accept the truth and the truth is the majority of Gazans love and support Hamas.

And here’s why. The Hamas leadership and members are suffering just as much as the ordinary citizens of Gaza. They endure the hardship of the siege, they have their power supplies cut off, they have to put up with Israel switching off the tap water when it chooses. They, too are suffering and the people can see this with their own eyes.

It really does appear as if the Hamas leadership can not be bought or corrupted.

Millions of dollars and Euros are pouring in to the Palestinian Authority’s coffers controlled by Abu Mazen and NOT ONE CENT reaches the people of Gaza. Sadly, it seems the Palestinian leader is overseeing the brutal siege of his own people in Gaza without a care or thought for them.


I am quoting below, Tony Sayegh, seen as a great analysist by some readers at Palestinian Pundit. I called him name, the last was, the Great Anal-ysist.

I continueosly mocked him for blaming deaths of Gazans on Hamas, and calling Hamas to hide, and, and…

“With this poor performance, Hamas is likely to lose support, which is the opposite of what happened to Hizbullah. The masses need to see brains at work, not just one funeral after another.
Tony Sayegh”

“Keep that closed mind of yours (The closed mind is MINE)and keep offering martyrs for nothing; the results are what counts.”

“The Palestinians by refusing to learn are moving from one defeat to another.”

“You know, now I realize why the Palestinians, even though they have been resisting far longer than any other Arab people (90 years!), are still incapable of developing an effective resistance.”

“The Palestinians need to get serious about resistance if they want to resist. On the other hand, if this is all a show (as Arafat did) to get to the “negotiating” table, then no Palestinian should be willing to die for such a charade.”

“17 Killed in Gaza, Today

And Yet, Hamas “Massed” its Forces to “Confront” Tanks, Helicopter Gunships and Missiles……

Excuse Me, But This is Mass Suicide, Not Resistance

Damn It! God Gave You a Brain; Use It!!”

TON TFUUUU concluded: “You ask, what can Hamas do? At a minimum hide, in the face of a superior force.”

I am sure you shall recognize the smell, and know who did it..
Uprooted palestinian 03.03.08 – 4:11 pm #


Tony is right , when he said At a minimum , Hide in the face of a superior Force . Absolutely spot on he does not want the resistance to be wiped out by the criminals in the IOF . HE CARES , im not sure why you refuse to understand it .

fatima 03.03.08 – 5:35 pm #
He was never right. Read his words.

He assumed, immagined, farted that, “Hamas “Massed” its Forces to “Confront” Tanks, Helicopter Gunships and Missiles……”

Knowing hamas fought its biggest battle the last few days with only 20% of its manpower, you may conclude that Hamas never massed it’s forces to “Confront” Tanks, Helicopter Gunships and Missiles……”

Was he right in saying: ‘”Hamas is copying Arafat in using the “resistance” as a vehicle for political negotiations.”??

Was he right in attacking Haneya day and night for months?? Was he right in Saying (farting):

“With this poor performance, Hamas is likely to lose support, which is the opposite of what happened to Hizbullah. The masses need to see brains at work, not just one funeral after another.Tony Sayegh”

Hamas with it’s “poor”performance, won the elections, won the battle with Dahlan, used the months that followed, to prepare for knocking the wall, to get more that food supply, and use it to confront and stop the invasion.Uprooted palestinian 03.04.08 – 6:23 am #

Was he right in ivolving Syria in the consipracy to kill Maghiye?


Well, I have to confess he was partially right once.

“One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results. By that definition, a certain amount of insanity is apparent in the leadership of the resistance.”

Insanity is farting the same fart over and over.

Uprooted palestinian 03.04.08 – 6:29 am #

Tony, over several month was mocking Hamas Leaders, calling them Habillas

I search for and got this thread of posts. Click it please in order to know Tony the great Anal-ysist,

I recently learned Molly, the real founder of PP, is a an anti-Zionist Jewis “Seaking Justice” She rarely post, I assume she stay on the bachground, (kitchen) cooking the policy of PP,


Ziyaad Lunat, The Electronic Intifada, 14 October 2008

A Palestinian home torched during the Acre riots. (Oren Ziv/

Recent riots in the Israeli town of Acre have attracted unwanted attention towards its Arab residents, Palestinian citizens of Israel who make a third of the city’s population. The disturbances began after Jewish extremists attacked a Palestinian man for driving during the religious holiday of Yom Kippur, when traffic in Israel largely comes to a halt. This was followed by an outbreak of violence during which Jewish mobs attacked the Palestinian neighborhood in Acre’s old city, throwing stones and torching homes.

These events have been interpreted by mainstream media as an aberration in Israel’s model “democracy.” The BBC echoed official Israeli discourse, emphasizing that the so-called “Israeli-Arabs” “have full rights as Israeli citizens.” Meanwhile, outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert called Acre “a shining example of co-existence.” However, the latest disturbances have brought to the fore a deeper issue: the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians from inside Israel by Israeli Jewish extremists. According to Israeli journalist Gideon Levy, the violence at Acre was reminiscent of Bosnia, with mobs dehumanizing and inciting hatred against the Palestinians.

Historically, the Zionist state has been in the forefront of the efforts to suppress its Palestinian citizens, through a complex legal framework that circumspectly discriminates against them, but allows for Israel to sustain a “democratic” facade. One example of state discrimination is Israel’s policy of expropriating land from Palestinians and reserving it for “the Jewish people in perpetuity” and allowing the Jewish National Fund to administer these properties. This is matched by a separate, but related, policy of house demolitions linked to severe restriction on building permits that are designed to contain Palestinian urban growth within Israel. Therefore, the state has acted as a guarantor of the fragile and often contradictory relationship between democratic values and Zionist’s racial doctrine.

Israel provides political representation for its Palestinian citizens, as well as other social and economic rights, but only to the extent of their submissive acceptance of Jewish domination of the public sphere. This means that only the Zionist establishment can dictate the rules of the game for which the Palestinians are allowed to maintain their citizenship rights. In turn, the Israeli state displays its Palestinian citizens as a token of its democratic principles and practices to the rest of the world.

In spite of these measures, Palestinian citizens of Israel have progressively consolidated their capacity for political mobilization and have demanded equal rights under the banner of “a state for all its citizens.” There has also been a growing recognition of their common faith with their Palestinian brethren in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. This connection was evident in October 2000, when Israeli security forces killed 13 of its own Palestinian citizens who were protesting in solidarity with Palestinians under occupation in the first month of the second Palestinian intifada.

As a result, the Zionist state found itself having to deal with a “Palestinian problem” in the occupied territories and it became increasingly anxious about the “demographic threat” that its own Palestinian citizens came to represent. Israeli politicians on the left and right of the political spectrum have tried to devise solutions to contain the growing political and demographic strength of its Palestinian citizens. Some have advocated the “transfer” of the Palestinian citizens residing close to the internationally-recognized armistice line marking the boundary between Israel and the West Bank as part of a land swap with the Palestinian Authority in final status negotiations. Tzipi Livni, the prime minister delegate, argued that a Palestinian state would also provide a national solution for the Palestinian citizens of the Jewish state, hinting that they should voluntarily move to the Bantustans if unhappy with the Jewish state. More recently, there were proposals for a national service program as a means to compel Arab loyalty to the state.

The Zionist state however, in its efforts to maintain international legitimacy, has been incapable of devising a radical “final solution” for its Palestinian citizens, mirroring the ethnic cleansing of 1948, which would appease an increasingly impatient electorate. Jewish Israelis have progressively shifted their views to the far right and are increasingly prone to hold extremist views. A 2007 poll by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel shows that half of Jewish Israelis want their government to encourage Jewish emigration from Israel and 75 percent of Jewish youths said Arabs are less intelligent and clean than Jews. These results echo other similar surveys that indicate widespread racism within Jewish Israeli society and these voices have been growing inside government, too.

Extremist elements inside Israel have thus successfully mobilized to bypass the state and take matters into their own hands, for the state is increasingly seen as incapable of silencing Palestinian demands for full equality. The settler movement, long known for operating in this manner, have pioneered this model in the occupied territories. A settler pogrom on the village Asira al-Qabaliya last month alarmed the Israeli establishment by openly demonstrating its inability to control its most extremist citizens. This rift has now crossed into Israel, signaling a new struggle.

Last month, Professor Ze’ev Sternhell, a member of Peace Now, was the victim of an ideologically-motivated bomb attack by Zionist extremists who oppose any governmental “concessions” with the Palestinians in the occupied territories. Not only are the latest mob riots in Acre an expression of a deeply-rooted antagonism towards the Palestinian citizens of Israel, but they also signify a shift within Israeli society, where Zionist zealots bypass the state to articulate their supremacist ideology.

Thus, the Israeli establishment now has to deal with its own intra-communal conflict. Since its creation, Israel has tried to reconcile its image as a “democracy” with the Jewish exclusivist ideology of Zionism and must now contend with its own extremists, who do will not hesitate to wage war against the state in order to further redeem the land of “greater” Israel for an exclusively Jewish population. This rift is slowly disintegrating Israel’s facade of co-existence and it is only a matter of time before Israel’s internal contradictions are laid bare to the eyes of the world.

Ziyaad Lunat is a long-term activist for Palestinian rights. He is currently on the organizing committee of the Nakba60-London, to commemorate the 60th anniversary of Palestinian dispossession and on the coordinating committee of Emory Advocates for Justice in Palestine, in Atlanta. He can be reached at z.lunat A T gmail D O T com.

Extremist West Bank settlers help stir Acre violence
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 15 October 2008

Crowds of Jewish Israelis clash with riot police in the northern Israeli city of Acre, 10 October 2008. (David Furst/AFP)

Acre, a mixed city of approximately 52,000 people in northern Israel, recently witnessed four days of violent clashes between Palestinian citizens of Israel and Israeli Jewish residents.

Israeli national leaders, including caretaker prime minister Ehud Olmert, prime minister designate Tzipi Livni, and President Shimon Peres, called for calm and for “both sides” to refrain from violence. They portrayed the events as being local, religious and communal in origin. Peres visited Acre and convened a meeting of Arab and Jewish civic and religious leaders aimed at restoring peace. Palestinians in Israel view the events as the product of widespread incitement and organized efforts by Jewish extremists to force them out of their homes.

While the facts and meaning of these events have been heavily contested, one of the underreported factors is the extent to which militant Israeli settlers from the West Bank, funded by donors in the United States, have instigated tension in Acre and other cities in an attempt to reduce their Arab populations. The Palestinian residents of Acre are amongst the 1.5 million Palestinians in Israel, who unlike Palestinians under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, have Israeli citizenship, though their rights are severely curtailed. They are the survivors and descendants of the 1948 Nakba during which most Palestinians were expelled from their homeland. These Palestinians are often referred to generically as “Arabs” within Israel both in their own population and by Israeli Jews.

The proximate cause

The disturbances began after a Palestinian resident of Acre drove into the eastern, predominantly Jewish neighborhood around midnight on Wednesday, 9 October, during the observance of the Yom Kippur Jewish holiday. This prompted a violent reaction from Jewish residents and soon, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported, “Police warded off hundreds of Jewish rioters, chanting ‘death to the Arabs,’ and trying to storm the city’s main road” (Jack Khoury, Nadav Shragai and Yoav Stern, “Acre sees worst violence in years as Jews and Arabs resume clashes,”, 9 October 2008, update of 21:29). As word spread of the attack on the driver, Arab youths came to the scene.

According to Acre resident Tawfiq Jamal’s own account, he drove with his son and a friend, at around 11pm in order to pick up his daughter from the home of relatives where she had been helping prepare baked sweets for a wedding. When they arrived, according to Jamal, “I asked my son to take the baking dishes out of the car and proceeded to walk [toward the house] when [the Jews] suddenly began hurling stones at us” (Sharon Roffe-Ophir, “Arab motorist: I narrowly escaped lynch in Akko,” Ynet, 9 October 2008).

Jamal described how he and the two young men narrowly escaped a lynching. He strenuously denied accusations he had been drinking and deliberately started the incident by playing loud music. Acre police commander Avraham Edri confirmed much of Jamal’s account, telling the Knesset’s Internal Affairs Committee that:

“When my officers arrived at the scene, they had to handle 300-400 people who had already lifted the driver’s car in the air. Our first mission was to prevent casualties. We released the driver from the mob and helped him into an apartment nearby … My staff served as a barrier between him and the excited mob; the policemen were hurt but not one civilian was injured” (“Acre driver apologizes for incident,” The Jerusalem Post, 12 October 2008).

Speaking before the Knesset committee on 12 October, Jamal apologized for driving into the Jewish area and said he had “made a mistake.” Despite this, Israeli police arrested Jamal for “harming religious sensitivities, speeding and reckless endangerment,” and remanded him in custody (Jack Khoury, “Police arrest driver who sparked Acre riots for ‘harming religious sensitivities,'” Haaretz, 13 October 2008). There were no reports of arrests specifically for the attempted lynching of Jamal and his companions.

Violent clashes between Jewish and Palestinian residents continued for several nights as police intervened with riot control methods including water cannon. According to Israeli police, many Arab Palestinian families had to be evacuated and about a dozen of their homes were set on fire.

In the end, 54 people — Jews and Arabs — were arrested, about 100 cars and several dozen shops were damaged. Several minor injuries were reported. While Jews and Arabs took part in the violence, on 12 October, on the third day of the disturbances, Major-General Shimon Koren, commander of Israel’s Northern District police, said the riots had been instigated by Jews (“Police official says instigators of Akko riots Jewish,” Ynet, 12 October 2008), and, “The majority of rioters causing disturbances in [Acre] are Jews” (Sharon Roffe-Ofir, “Northern District police commander: Majority of Akko riots [sic] are Jews,” Ynet, 12 October 2008).

The settler connection
Palestinian citizens of Israel and Israeli Jews live in close proximity in Acre, a UNESCO World Heritage site, as they have done for generations. But in recent years, extremist Jewish groups affiliated with West Bank settlers have moved in with the stated aim of making the city more Jewish.

Palestinians are concentrated in the central old city and near the harbor, while Jews are established in the eastern part and outer rings. The vast majority of the Jewish residents of the city are Mizrahim — working-class Jews whose first generation came as immigrants to Israel from Arab countries. Mizrahim, although Jews, also faced severe discrimination by an Israeli state dominated by European Ashkenazi Jewish elites. Both communities are disadvantaged in different ways. Many Palestinians in the city are the survivors and descendants of those who were forced to leave their homes when Israel was established in 1948. All but 3,000 of the town’s 13,000 Palestinian citizens in 1948 were forced out. Today, Palestinians comprise about 27 percent of Acre’s population. Like all Palestinian citizens of Israel they have experienced systematic legal, social and economic discrimination and political exclusion. As Joseph Massad points out in The Persistence of the Palestinian Question, Mizrahim were often pushed to the edges of Israeli Jewish society and in many cases were housed in the former homes of expelled Palestinians. Culturally marginalized, and much poorer than Ashkenazi Jews, the Mizrahim have became the base constituency for the right-wing Likud party, Shas and other overtly racist anti-Arab parties.

Given the numbers of people involved in the troubles, long-time Jewish residents were certainly among them. But some Arab residents blamed the worsening tension not on long-time residents, but on an influx of militant youth affiliated with the national religious West Bank settler movement. Indeed, Baruch Marzel, a settler leader from near Hebron in the West Bank, visited Acre during the riots and vowed to help Jews in the city to set up a “defense organization” (Sharon Roffe-Ofir, “Peres visits Akko, urges side to exercise tolerance,” Ynet, 13 October 2008). Barzel was leader of the banned Kach party founded by the late Meir Kahane which supports the expulsion of all Palestinians, and he remains a prominent leader of racist settler groups.

Yeshiva Hesder-Akko, founded in 2001, is a pro-settler national religious school in the midst of a now majority Arab neighborhood called Wolfson. Over the years, many of the area’s Jewish residents had become more affluent and moved out, and poorer Arabs moved in. This hesder-yeshiva, a school for Israeli Jewish men who combine military service with religious study, often attracting strict adherents of the militant settler movement, is run by Yossi Stern, a rabbi from the militant West Bank settlement of Elon Moreh. Stern, who is also on the Acre city council, told The Washington Post last year that he and his associates were working on projects designed to “attract Jews to Acre,” including a 350-unit housing complex designated for Jewish military families, and another yeshiva (Scott Wilson, “Israel’s Arab Citizens, Isolation and Exclusion,” 20 December 2007). The Washington Post also reported that Palestinian residents and leaders consider these efforts to be part of a systematic assault on their presence in the city using tactics long deployed against Palestinians in the West Bank. Some accuse Acre’s Likud mayor of supporting the efforts.

Yeshiva Hesder-Akko’s own website states that “[f]rom a luxuriant Jewish neighborhood it [Wolfson] has turned into a decrepit Arab neighborhood.” The school’s purpose is “to try to return and strengthen the Jewish character of the city.” Although the city was “almost lost” to Jews, the site states that “The long awaited salvation has begun.” According to the website’s “About Us” page, the yeshiva was built with funds from a donor in New York. Volunteers have also raised funds from synagogues in the US, for the “special aim of the yeshiva [which] is to attract more young Jewish families by strengthening and maintaining the Zionist Jewish character of this ancient Jewish city” (Abigail Klein Leichman, “Back from Akko to help hesder yeshiva,” The New Jersey Jewish Standard, 21 June 2006).

Two years ago, similar, but much less serious disturbances occurred in Acre during another Jewish holiday. Arab Knesset member Abbas Zakour had previously written to Israel’s public security minister appealing for police protection for the Arab communities against harassment by Jewish extremists, including the stoning of Arab cars during Jewish holidays.

The events in Acre coincide with an upsurge in violence by the radical settler movement against Palestinians across the Israeli-occupied West Bank, and a pipe bomb attack against an Israeli left-wing professor. While those actions have received more attention, the activities of affiliated groups against Palestinian citizens of Israel have been largely ignored beyond that community.

Sheikh Raed Salah, the head of Israel’s Islamic movement, accused Israeli political and religious leaders of facilitating the actions of extremists over a long period of time with the goal of heightening tensions so that Palestinians inside Israel could eventually be expelled. He said Acre’s Palestinian population was being targeted for “cleansing,” and that Arabs in other coastal cities including Haifa and Jaffa could be next (Palestinian Information Center (Arabic site), 13 October 2008). Salah added that Palestinians in Israel were aware of the threat and would not be driven out. The fear that events in Acre were evidence of a concerted effort to expel them was widely echoed by Palestinians citizens of Israel.

An almost identical hesder-yeshiva was recently founded in the Arab Ajami neighborhood of Jaffa, south of Tel Aviv, also with the goal of increasing the Jewish population of that city (Eli Senyor, “Jaffa: Yeshiva to be built in heart of Arab neighborhood,” Ynet, 24 Septemer 2008).

Some of the Israeli politicians who have been most outspoken in calling for the expulsion of Palestinians and supporting radical settlers did their best to confirm such fears, engaging in the kind of incitement that has been escalating in recent years. Knesset member, former cabinet minister, and settler Effie Eitam called the events “an anti-Semitic pogrom at the heart of Israel on the holiest days of the Jewish people.” Another member called on the authorities to “respond harshly to the Arab pogrom on Yom Kippur.” Esterina Tartman, a Knesset member of former deputy prime minister Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu party, called for the removal of Palestinians citizens from Israel on the grounds that “the pogrom in [Acre] is yet another confirmation that Arab Israelis are the real danger threatening the state” (Amnon Meranda, “MK Eitam slams ‘anti-Semitic pogrom in heart of Israel,'” Ynet, 9 October 2008).

Some Jewish residents of the city circulated calls for Jews to boycott Arab businesses to punish the Palestinian population.

The violent actions of settler groups against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank have gone unchecked by the Israeli army. There is now clear evidence of similar organized, planned violence being directed at Palestinians inside Israel amidst a generalized atmosphere of racist incitement. There is no sign that the Israeli state is prepared to confront this phenomenon any more than it does in the West Bank. Unless this changes, there is a strong likelihood that racist violence may resume and spread. This may destroy the remaining threads of coexistence inside Israel. Jewish extremists would see that as a great success if their goal is to lay the ground for the expulsion of Palestinians from Israel.

Co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, Ali Abunimah is author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli- Palestinian Impasse (Metropolitan Books, 2006). This article is adapted from a longer version published by The Palestine Center.


“Death to Arabs!”
The Acre Riots


Israel has been suffering its worst bout of inter-communal violence since the start of the second intifada, with a week of what has been widely presented as “rioting” by Jewish and Arab residents of the northern port city of Acre.

The trigger for the outbursts occurred on the night of Yom Kippur, or the Day of Atonement, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. The country effectively shuts down for 24 hours as religious Jews fast and abstain from most activity, leaving secular Jews little choice but to do likewise.

According to reports, an Arab resident, Tawfik Jamal, outraged a group of Jews by disturbing the day’s sanctity and driving to relatives in a predominantly Jewish neighbourhood. He and his teenage son were pelted with stones.

The pair sought sanctuary in the relatives’ home as a mob gathered outside chanting “Death to the Arabs”. Israeli police who tried to rescue the family fled when they were attacked, too.

With news of Mr Jamal’s death mistakenly broadcast over mosque loudspeakers, Arab youths marched to the city centre and smashed shop windows in a display of anger.

In subsequent days, Jewish gangs have roamed Acre’s streets and torched several Arab homes, forcing dozens of Arab families living in Jewish-dominated areas to flee.

An Arab member of the Israeli parliament, Ahmed Tibi, observed that what is occurring in Acre is not a riot but a “pogrom”, conducted by Jewish residents against their Arab neighbours.

Communal tensions are always high in the half a dozen “mixed cities” like Acre, the only places in Israel where Jews and Arabs live in close proximity, even if in largely separate neighbourhoods.

But the situation has grown especially strained in Acre, where some Arab residents have escaped the deprivation and overcrowding of their main neighbourhood, the walled Old City, by moving to Jewish areas. Acre’s Arabs are also numerically strong, comprising a third of the local population.

Despite pronouncements from Israeli leaders that the violence is damaging Acre’s image as a model of coexistence, the reality is of a deeply divided city, where the wounds of the 1948 war have yet to heal.

During the war, most local Palestinians were either killed or forced to leave, with the remainder penned up in the old city. Jewish immigrants, brought to settle the empty houses, were encouraged to see themselves as reclaiming the city for Jews.

In recent years the movement of Arab families into these “Judaised” neighbourhoods has revived talk of the need for Acre to be cleansed again of its Arabs.

The problem has been exacerbated by the relocation to Acre of some of the fanatical settlers withdrawn from Gaza three years ago and by the founding in 2001 of a hesder yeshiva, a school for religious men that combines army service.

The police have stated that the violence in Acre caught them by surprise, but there was little justification for their complacency.

Abbas Zakour, an Arab member of parliament and an Acre resident, had written to the public security minister days before Yom Kippur warning that it would offer a pretext for Jewish extremists to attack Arab residents.

He was concerned that, as in previous years, Jews would throw stones at Arab cars breaking the unofficial 24-hour curfew in the Galilee region, where Arabs are a majority. The failure of the police to intervene, he added, “leads the Arab public to believe that police are deliberately allowing the young Jews to attack innocent Arab residents who drive by”.

In a society where the grip of Jewish religious fundamentalism is tightening – stoked by the high birth rate of ultra-Orthodox Jews and the state’s generous support of a separate religious education system – such incidents regularly occur on Yom Kippur and less frequently on Saturdays, the official day of rest.

The local media reported that over Yom Kippur ambulances and paramedics were stoned. At one point Acre’s ambulance station was surrounded by Jewish youths who smashed its windows. As a result, the service’s local director, Eli Been, ordered staff to wear helmets and bulletproof vests.

Given the failure to punish, or even rebuke, Jewish extremists for such acts of vandalism, it is hardly surprising that in places like Acre they are emboldened to vent their indignation at Arab neighbours.

What has particularly disturbed the Arab minority, however, has been the response from politicians and the police to events in Acre.

Israeli leaders have tried to calm tensions by paying lip service to the idea of coexistence. But at the same time, rather than denouncing the Jewish mob, they have intimated that Acre’s Arab residents provoked the attacks.

During Sunday’s cabinet meeting, Ehud Olmert, the outgoing prime minister, stressed, in reference to the Yom Kippur violence, that the wider Arab population must act “according to the norms of a democratic state”.

His probable successor, Tzipi Livni, added of Yom Kippur that “every citizen has to respect this day” – a reprimand to Arab citizens for driving rather than to extremist Jews for turning into a lynch mob.

Such indirect condemnations roused others to greater provocation. Yuval Steinitz of the Likud Party called the violence a “pogrom” against, rather than by, Acre’s Jews. The local chief rabbi, Yosef Yashar, compared the city’s Arabs to Nazis. And on Monday Jewish far-right activists arrived in Acre from Hebron to stir things further.

Mr Jamal, the hapless driver who provoked the violence, has been widely blamed – apparently without evidence – for playing his music loudly and smoking while driving, as though this justified the attack.

He was finally brought before the parliament on Sunday to demonstrate his contrition. To much abuse from right-wing legislators, he asked for forgiveness and told the parliament he was ready to “sacrifice his neck” to restore good relations between the two communities.

The next day the country’s president, Shimon Peres, reminded community leaders: “There is one law and one police.”

As if to disprove him, the police arrested Mr Jamal the same day, accusing him of offending religious sensitivities, speeding and reckless endangerment – though it was unclear whom he had endangered apart from himself. He was released to house arrest two days later.

Mr Tibi, the parliamentarian, sounded a rare note of sanity when he observed: “I wonder if they will start to arrest Jews who eat and drink during the month of Ramadan.”

Meanwhile, Acre’s Jewish residents are organising a boycott of Arab businesses. They have apparently been joined by the mayor, Shimon Lankri, who cancelled the annual drama festival due to be held in the Old City in a few days. His move was widely interpreted as a way to “punish” Arab residents, who are major beneficiaries of the event.

Articulating popular sentiments, a senior police official told a local website: “The Arab public will pay dearly for the events of Yom Kippur eve. They have succeeded in greatly antagonising the Jewish population and I don’t see them being forgiven for the next few years.”

In what looked like a desperate move to avert further damage to the Old City’s already weak economy, Arab community leaders issued a condemnation of Mr Jamal and a plea for tolerance – though the gesture was not reciprocated by their Jewish counterparts.

Few in the Arab minority share their president’s confidence about the legal system. They see that there are two sets of laws, one for Jews and another Arabs, and that the police have two faces, depending on who is doing the stone-throwing.

They know that when Jewish settlers attack Palestinians in the West Bank, or even Israeli soldiers, they do so with impunity. Equally, they remember that in 2005 when a settler opened fire on a bus with his army-issue gun in the Galilean town of Shefa’amr, killing four Arab citizens, the police’s priority was chasing the Arab men they suspected had overpowered and killed him.

Even more painful are memories of the events at the beginning of the intifada, in October 2000, when Arab citizens protested against the military whirlwind unleashed against their Palestinian kin in the occupied territories. The worst violence inside Israel occurred at the town of Umm al-Fahm, where Arab demonstrators threw stones at cars driving along the nearby highway.

Politicians did not talk about Arab sensitivities, or the need for calm, at that time. Instead they sent in a sniper unit. In the ensuing crackdown 13 Arab demonstrators were shot dead, and hundreds injured with live ammunition and rubber bullets.

Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are “Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East” (Pluto Press) and “Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair” (Zed Books). His website is

This article originally appeared in The National (, published in Abu Dhabi.


ritalin said…
Extremism is a tool used by elites to destabilze peace loving peoples.extremism

Fatah: Eject the traitors from your ranks

Contibuted by Lucia

by Khaled Amayreh / October 7th, 2008

The recent revelations by an Israeli journalist about a secret meeting between high-ranking Palestinian security chiefs and the commanders of the Israeli occupation army, which reportedly took place at the Jewish colony of Beit El near Ramallah in September, has shocked the Palestinian community here. According to Israeli journalist Nahom Barnea, the Palestinian officers told their Israeli “colleagues” that “we have no conflict” and that “we have only one common enemy which is Hamas.” Barnea also revealed that Palestinian security chiefs, whom he mentioned by name, asked their “Israeli colleagues” to “equip us with weapons” in order to “re-conquer Gaza.” Barnea, who attended the meeting after receiving the Palestinian participants’ consent, reported that the Palestinians sought to impress the Israeli security chiefs by briefing them on aggressive measures the PA security agencies had been carrying out against Hamas’ civilian infrastructure, including charities and civil society organizations. The Palestinian security chiefs even bragged about raiding mosques as part of their efforts to hound and harass Hamas.

Interestingly, reports and comments on the “Beit El meeting” were censored by the PA-run and PA-influenced media, including the three main daily newspapers, Al-Quds, al-Ayyam, and al-Hayatul Jadida as well as by the European-funded Maan News Agency, which has been effectively taken over by the Fatah organization. Indeed, had it not been for the coverage of the event by some foreign-based satellite TV stations such as al-Jazeera as well as some internet sites, most Palestinians here wouldn’t have heard about that meeting. The Beit El scandal is most likely just one of many meetings of “security coordination” between the PA and Israel. Indeed, one could argue with little exaggeration that the Palestinian security agencies have been more or less working in concert with the Israeli occupation army in the West Bank.

Some Palestinian villagers have reported that they saw Israeli soldiers and Palestinian soldiers jointly carrying out raids and arrests in the northern West Bank. Moreover, it is widely believed that the closure by Israel of numerous Palestinian schools, orphanages, charities and businesses in the West Bank was carried out in close coordination with the Israeli army. The PA functionaries and operatives routinely deny suggestions that the PA is collaborating with Israel against its own people. However, there is irrefutable evidence suggesting that the PA is not telling the truth. The daily arrests of Palestinian activists by both Israeli and PA security agencies are very telling, to say the least.

It may be a bit reassuring that some Fatah leaders in the West Bank, such as Qaddura Fares, have spoken out against the scandalous encounter at Beit El, describing the security chiefs involved as “traitors who have nothing to do Fatah.” However, it remains really disturbing that these men committed a disgraceful act with total impunity. In a recent interview with the London-based al Hewar TV, Fares urged the Palestinian leadership in Ramallah to fire these security chiefs.

However, one is still deeply disquieted by the fact that the Fatah organization, nearly in its entirety, been reticent and done next to nothing to punish, expose or even rebuke these men who have committed what amounts to be national apostasy. To be sure, Fatah is not a monolithic movement, neither ideologically nor even politically. Nonetheless, there are a lot of honest and patriotic people within the movement. We also understand that the good people within Fatah, who probably constitute the majority, are being marginalized, isolated and impoverished financially by the Oslo gang which has the money and the political backing by Israel and the United States. However, Fatah can’t be forgiven for allowing, even passively, these money-grabbing opportunists and hangers-on to besmirch a movement that has produced people like Abu Ammar and Abu Jihad and thousands of martyrs who lived and died for Palestine.

Treason is treason whether committed by Fatah or the Southern Lebanon Army or by the infamous village leagues. And there is no real difference between a Shin Beth agent who leads Israeli death squads to the whereabouts of a Palestinian freedom fighter and a PA security officer who carries out Israeli instructions under the disgraceful rubric of security coordination. Needless to say, a Palestinian security chief who tells the commanders of the Israeli occupation army that “we have common interests, common goals, and common enemies” is a traitor par excellence who should be immediately arrested and prosecuted for grand treasons. Just imagine an Israeli officer telling a Palestinian security chief, for example, that “we have one enemy, it is the Jewish settlers.” Would such a proverbial officer stay on his job for 24 hours?

It is therefore imperative that Fatah press and pressure its top leadership, which is the leadership of the Palestinian Authority, to launch a speedy investigation into what happened at the Beit El meeting and sack those security chiefs who have brought shame and infamy to decades of Palestinian struggle for liberty. Failing to act for whatever reason would only mean that Fatah is effectively being Zionized by allowing itself to be infiltrated and even taken over by Israeli agents who claim to be serving Palestinian national interests while in reality serving the interests of our enemy, Israel. Unfortunately, we can’t give the top Fatah leadership the benefit of the doubt since it is likely that the Beit El meeting took place with its full knowledge, approval and even blessing. This is probably what emboldened those security chiefs and made them attend the meeting and say what they reportedly said with brazen disregard to Palestinian national dignity. The attendance of the Israeli journalist, whom they knew would disseminate the details of their convivial meeting with the Israeli occupation officers, also tells us much about the mental level of these people.

Finally, one is really at loss trying to understand how Fatah is really sincere about national reconciliation with Hamas at a time when Fatah’s men tell Israeli security chiefs that “Hamas is the enemy” and “give us weapons and training to re-conquer Gaza.” In short, Fatah has to choose either reconciliation with Hamas or cordial relations with Israel, the occupier of our country and tormentor of our people. It can’t choose both.



OUT OF SUDDEN, THE “MAN” WHO SOLD 78% of PALESTINE criticises Abbas for considering negotiations as the only option

[ 15/10/2008 – 12:05 PM ]

AMMAN, (PIC)– The Palestinian chief negotiator, Ahmad Qurei criticised the line of politics pursued by President Mahmoud Abbas, during a meeting with the PA ambassadors to Arab states.

In a report published by the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi it was stated that Qurei criticised Abbas’s slogan which says that negotiations is the only strategic option open to the Palestinians describing such a slogan and the practical implementation of it as a serious political blunder and that the Palestinian people should have many strategic options instead of being restricted to negotiations, considering the shape of the present negotiations.

Qurei was also reported to have said during the meeting, which took place in Amman last Monday, that to consider negotiations as the only strategic option is a bet that is not compatible with the great sacrifices of the Palestinian people and does not take into consideration the real situation on the ground, pointing to the fact that there is a high probability that the negotiations will fail and turn into a punishment for the Palestinian people.

The Fatah leader, who participated in many rounds of covert and overt negotiations with the Israeli occupation, said that wagering on negotiations alone means losing because the negotiations are a lame duck and ineffective, admitting that long years of negotiations have not produced anything tangible for the Palestinian people on fundamental issues such as Jerusalem, water, refugees and the Palestinian state.

Qurei’s frank comments caused great surprise and debate amongst around 20 participants in the closed meeting which was held in one of Amman’s hotels, as these comments contradicted President Abbas’s line of politics.

Meanwhile, many ambassadors, especially those working in the Gulf states, complained that they are increasingly being seen as ambassadors of the Palestinian Authority and not of Palestine and that funds are not being channelled through them to the Palestinian people as the public has more trust in Hamas.


Do you believe this traitor, the Cement supplier of the Seperation Wall?


Other Related links

Abu al Fath: We have a common enemy – Hamas
Abbas’s officers and their Israeli counterparts classify Hamas as common foe
The “palestinian Man of Peace”
Why they love Mahmoud Abbas
Who do you blame for the internal Fatah-Hamas strife?
Abbas’s presidential guards passed from HERE
The (Anti-) Palestinian Authority
Hamas Had to Act and it DidWhose Coup, Exactly?
Abbas in the Service of Zion
Abbas advisor says Hamas fighting collaborators
The Trojan Horse of ZionismA tired Fatah struggles
Who is inciting Civil war in Palestine
PA could collapse soon
Saving President Abbas
Oslo’s baleful legacyPortrait of a Palestinian thug loved by the U.S.
Dahlan’s Photo Album
Zubaidi: Our leaders in Fatah and the PA are liars

McCain’s ‘crusader’ logic concerns Syria

By Sami Moubayed

As Puplished at PP

“……More recently, editorials have started appearing in the Syrian press, questioning whether Obama would actually be good for the Arabs, especially after his high-profile visit to Israel in which he declared his support for Tel Aviv. The selection of Joe Biden as his running mate also caused many Syrians to frown, associating him with the famous plan to partition Iraq into Shi’ite, Sunni and Kurdish zones.

Many Syrians have started rethinking. They fear that Obama, because of his Muslim origins, will work relentlessly to prove his “Americanism” by being more radical than Bush. Some have even began bracing themselves for a McCain victory, thinking that the retired Vietnam officer would have more courage to take serious initiatives in the Middle East, especially related to the Arab-Israeli peace process [COMMENT: Arab wishful thinking, again!].

Sadly, however, archiving is poor in the Arab world, and those who are now banking on a McCain victory fail to read his comments and career before running for the 2008 presidential elections. In 1992, McCain appeared on Larry King Live and gave two reasons why the US should involve itself militarily in the Middle East. One was because America was a “Judeo-Christian nation” (which, to the Muslim world, sounds like the Crusades).

The other was, “so long as the world’s energy resources came from that part of the world”…….”

# posted by Tony : 4:52 AM



Same shit, different pile . Arabs should bet on themselves.

I read the part of the Article as puplished by PP Anal-sist, who avoided puplishing the full article, in order to mock the Syrian “wishful thinking”, about reaching a deal with the US, to sell Iran, Palestine, and Hezbullah.

Do you expect the PP Anal-sist, mocking Syria day and night to tell his readers about Assaad:

  • the “outwardly attractive man” who “projected an aura of confidence and the satisfaction of a general who had just achieved a decisive victory”. McCain 1984
  • the“tough negotiator (who has) a great deal of mystique, tremendous stamina, and a lot of charm. All in all, he is a man of substance, and at his age [then 44], he will be a leader to be reckoned with in this part of the world. This man really has elements of genius – without any question!” Richard Nixon 1974,
  • “I invited the Syrian leader to come and visit me in Washington, but he replied that he had no desire ever to visit the United States. …I spent hours debating with Assad and listening to his analysis of events in the Middle East … he seemed to speak like a modern Saladin – as though it was his obligation to rid the region of foreign presence while preserving Damascus as the focal point of modern Arab unity.” Jimmy Carter.
  • “I was impressed by his [Assad’s] intelligence and almost total recall for detailed events going back more than 20 years.” Bill Clinton
  • “Ambassador Edward Djerejian …..informed prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, who said, “You will be dealing with the smartest man in the Middle East.” Rabin then warned against what he called a “loophole” in what the Americans were offering to Syria, because if there were any, “Hafez al-Assad will drive a truck through it”.

Do you expect the PP Anal-sist, mocking Syria day and night to tell his readers about Syria before Assad?

PP ignored this part of the artcle. Read it carefully and see how history repeat it self.

“Was Syria anti-American to start with? That is the question Syrians should explain to McCain when and if he becomes president. Only briefly, in 1963-1970, could the Syrian government be described as anti-American. After a tug-of-war between the US and Great Britain in 1949-1954, carried out by proxy through allies like Saudi Arabia and Iraq, Syria began charting its own course, with real democracy, in 1954.

During the elections of 1955, the ballots brought a communist into the Syrian parliament. Terror overtook the US State Department. It expressed fear “at the drift towards a leftist, anti-US position in Syria”. The US ambassador to Syria added, “If the present trend continues, there is strong possibility that a communist-dominated Syria will emerge, threatening the peace and stability of the area, and endangering the achievement of our objectives in the Near East.”

The US began talking of regime change in Damascus, and even financed two failed coups in the late 1950s, prompting the Syrians to expel a number of US diplomats. The US responded by expelling Syrian ambassador Farid Zayn al-Din from Washington. As a result, anti-Americanism soured and demonstrators stormed the US Embassy and the home of the ambassador.

Why would Syria – in the 1950s and today – support a superpower that was relentlessly trying to bring down its government? On the other hand, why would it turn down the friendship of another superpower – the USSR in the 1950s and Iran today – that was expressing unconditional military, political and economic support to the Syrians?

As early as 1956, the USSR gave Syria 400 million Syrian pounds (US$8 million) for oil extraction, and oversaw the supply of arms worth 20 million British pounds ($34 million), through Egypt. Trade with the Eastern bloc back then was at $19 million per year.

The US commented, after watching Syria snuggle up to the Russians, “Internal medicine will not do; surgery is required for the cancerous growth [of communism] in Syria.”

The US began to accuse Syria of meddling in the affairs of its neighbors, and destabilizing Lebanon. The parallel between 1955-1958 and 2005-2008 is haunting; bombs would explode in Beirut, and everybody would blame it on the Syrians. The US encouraged its regional allies to take action against Syria, saying that it would support any covert or overt anti-Syrian activity under Article 51 of the UN charter: self-defense.

Turkey moved its troops to the Syrian border, with US encouragement, and repeatedly violated Syrian airspace. The result, instead of a u-turn, was more Syrian-Soviet friendship. The formal US policy became to minimize contact with the Syrian government, now that the US ambassador was out of Damascus, and to support and fund the Syrian opposition. Records from the US put the amount paid to ambitious officers wanting to overthrow the regime at $3 million.

The Aleppo deputy in parliament, and former prime minister Maarouf al-Dawalibi, threatened to hold a plebiscite in Syria to show the US that the Russians were more popular than the Americans, because the latter were held responsible “for the Palestine tragedy”. The New York Times retaliated by describing him as “the most outspoken anti-American leader in the Arab world”.

At this stage, president Shukri al-Quwatli came out, for the first time in Syrian history, and described the US as “an enemy”, in July 1957. It was the Americans who had removed him from office in 1949, promoting, as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in Egypt in 2005, “stability over democracy”.

What else could Quwatli do? The Americans were financing revolution in Syria. They were calling on Syria’s neighbors to invade and topple the regime. They were levying accusations of regional adventurism against the Syrians. All of this was being done to a country that was never – in principal – anti-American.

Concerning the dilemma in Syrian-US relations, former secretary of state John Foster Dulles wrote in late 1957: “Efforts to persuade moderate Arab leaders to take an overt hard line towards Syria have failed. What alternatives do we have? Force is ruled out. Clandestine activity would not succeed. A hard line from the West would only drive Syria closer to the Soviet bloc.”

McCain was in his 20s then, studying at the Naval Academy at Annapolis. He was busy practicing as a lightweight boxer, earning a reputation as someone who loved history and literature, hated mathematics, and more importantly, stood up for people who were bullied.

Syria was bulled in 1955-1958, but it is doubtful if McCain was overly concerned with the small Mediterranean country then. Given all of the above, McCain should visit Damascus again with an open mind, as he did in 1984, to see that both good things and bad things don’t change that quickly in the Middle East.

And Arabs in general and Syrians in particular should think twice before betting on McCain.

Sami Moubayed is a Syrian political analyst.”

Coexistence with Israeli enemy impossible

The events in `Akka are just incredible. Imagine if this was in a Muslim country: imagine if a Muslim community was offended because a Christian driver drove through the neighborhood. Under such a scenario the Security Council would have met, and the US congress would have cried out. The US media are largely ignoring the clashes: or dismissing them as “sectarian clashes” as the New York Times has done. Sometimes you feel that Zionists would really like for the entire Arabs of the Middle East to relocate away from the region so as to not offend the religious sensibilities of the state. And that lousy Arab driver: how he appeared trembling as if he were a slave before an Israeli official committee offering the Israeli investigators to whip him if they so decide. A what unto the nations?
Posted by As’ad at 9:20 AM

Coexistence with Israeli enemy impossible

[ 12/10/2008 – 06:43 PM ]

Israeli rioters chant racist slogans like “death to Arabs”


Hamas lawmaker MP Mushir Al-Masri said on Saturday that the entire Palestinian people were sympathizing with their brethren in Akka city against the extremist Israeli groups, stressing that the “hour of victory was looming”.

“The moment of triumph was looming, and the day when Hamas’s soldiers and the Qassam Brigades liberate Akka was getting closer”, said Masri as he addressed thousands of Palestinian citizens participating in a pro-Akka rally organized by Hamas in Jabalya city, in the northern Gaza Strip.

He underlined that the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip were standing with their brothers in Akka in souls and in hearts, describing the extremist Zionist attacks on Akka as continuation for the series of the brutal crimes that were committed at the hands of the IOF troops against the Palestinian people wherever they live.

“The Israeli enemy wants to humiliate every Palestinian citizen living in Palestine, but we tell Akka that our men, youth, and children came today to tell her: your blood is our blood and your soul is our soul”, Masri emphasized.

Moreover, the Hamas legislator underscored that regardless of the Israeli aggression on Akka, the city will not bow to the occupation, and the determination and steadfastness of the people of Akka won’t be broken because history of Akka was written with blood and with the sacrifices of its men.

The [Israeli] enemy will be defeated at the walls of Akka as former invaders had been defeated in the past; and neither normalization nor [peace] negotiations would make us forget our usurped land in every inch in occupied Palestine”, the Hamas official stressed.

He also called on the Israelis to read the history of Akka very well in order to know for themselves that the city’s history confirms that Akka doesn’t bow to foreigners regardless of the pain they might inflict on her.

He also quoted the statement of the out-going Israeli premier Ehud Olmert who acknowledged that the dream of “greater Israel” had vanished and gone forever, urging the Palestinian negotiators to return back to the Palestinian mainstream, and to realize that co-existence with the Israeli enemy was impossible.

For his part, Dr. Ahmad Bahar, the acting PLC speaker, condemned the Israeli aggressions on Akka city that, he said, prove beyond doubt the “big lie” of the Israeli democracy, urging the Palestinian people in the 1948-occupied lands to unite in confronting the Israeli schemes against their existence.

Haneyya calls for international protection for Palestinians in Akka

[ 12/10/2008 – 08:46 PM ]

GAZA, (PIC)– The Palestinian prime minister Ismael Haneyya has urged Sunday the international community to provide an international protection for the Palestinian people in Akka city and to bridle the programmed Israeli aggressions on them.

“They (Palestinians in Akka) were experiencing repressive policies on all levels”, Haneyya stressed in a press conference he held in Gaza city, confirming that his government was anxiously monitoring the vicious attacks of the Israeli settlers and the Israeli occupation police against the city’s indigenous people.

He described those attacks as “programmed” policy to push the Palestinians to abandon their homes. More
aneyya calls for international protection for Palestinians in Akka

Syria: Riots Proof of Israel’s Racist Policy


The Syrian government reacted to the Akko Riots that began on Yom Kippur by dubbing the occurrences “an expression of a methodical policy of racism” seeking to eliminate Arab presence in the occupied Palestinian territories by frightening the sect into leaving the country.

An article published by the state-run Tishrin Daily said, “The Akko incidents testify not only to the spreading of racism throughout Israeli society, whose roots date back to the establishment of the Zionist entity on Palestinian land, but also to the cancelation of all claims that Israel is an island of democracy.”

“Its hate and terror crimes have been known and documented for 60 years. These crimes derive from pure Zionist intentions, rabbinical orders, and conventions of the Zionist movement dealing with the banishment of the other, original land-owners.”

The article went on to say that “what occurred in Akko is an expression of a methodical and consistent policy of racism attempting to fight the presence of Arabs in Israel by frightening them into leaving, similarly to methods adopted by the ‘Haganah’ gangs and other Zionist terrorist gangs.”

The article added, “The settlers who were brought from Safed and Tiberias set fire to Arab homes… with the direct support of Israeli military units in order to thwart any attempt at objection by the residents of those homes and succeed in their mission to Judaize Akko and Arab property,” it said.

The article also said that “despite all of the terrorism directed against Akko’s Arabs, the Zionists did not succeed in achieving their mission.”

The piece concludes by criticizing the US government and its consistent support of Israel. “After all of this, is it not shameful that the US has conspired to revoke the UN Resolution determining that Zionism is a form of racism and discrimination? Is this not the US’ green light to Israel, to complete its plans to transfer the Arabs?”

Meanwhile MK Ahmad Tibi (United Arab List-Ta’al) voiced his objections over the arrest of the Arab whose Yom Kippur drive through an Israeli neighborhood, calling the move an unbelievable and unlawful decision made by Israel Police.”

Tibi added that “the arrest proves that police have yielded to Jewish hooligans, and I wonder if from now on they will start arresting Jews who eat and drink during the Ramadan.”

Hezbollah Condemns Aggressions against Acre, Al-Aqsa


Hezbollah firmly condemned the Israeli aggressions against the Palestinian citizen of occupied Acre and al-Aqsa Mosque, noting that the Zionist gangs and Israeli occupation forces are launching nowadays a series of organized attacks against the noble people of Acre in order to displace them from their land.

In a statement it released on Tuesday, Hezbollah declared solidarity with the Palestinians in their heroic confrontations against the Zionists, calling on them to keep up the resistant work and performance to safeguard the land and dignity.

The statement also stressed that the Israeli breaches wouldn’t have taken place without an international conspiracy against the Palestinian cause and without an Arabic slackness regarding the Palestinian people rights.

Hezbollah noted that the mentioned breaches constitute a continuation to the racial displacement plot executed by the Israeli occupation forces. The Resistance party noted that among the flagrant images of this racism was the profanation of the sacredness of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the alteration of an oratory inside it to a Jewish synagogue. “This is a big crime with respect to this lofty and supercilious nation,” the statement emphasized.

Hezbollah also condemned the Arab and international silence over the whole case, describing it as absolute and suspicious. The party called on the Arab and Islamic nations to stand effectively at the side of the people of the occupied Palestine to help them defend their land. “It should be known that the Palestinian right is a Holy right,” the statement asserted, adding that “all attacks and assaults would not be able to prevent its return to this Resistant and fighter nation.”

Book review: Israel’s occupation, inside out

Raymond Deane, The Electronic Intifada, 13 October 2008

Few conflicts, particularly “regional” ones, have spawned such mountains of analysis as that between Israeli Jews and Palestinian Arabs. What makes this situation exceptional, however, is the fact that Israel’s one-sided war on the Palestinian people continues unabated while these books are being written, published, read and sometimes reviewed. In the time that it takes me to write this article, the state of Israel will in all probability have committed new crimes, more Palestinians will have been killed, tortured or dispossessed, and the Zionist project — in the full light of day (metaphorically — many of these crimes take place at dead of night) — will have inched inexorably forward: “another dunum, another goat,” as the old Zionist adage about land colonization goes.

The professional book-reviewer will hardly complain about this state of affairs. The activist reviewer, however, will rapidly tire of reading successive accounts of the same series of events, and will finally demand that any new book worth its salt should present a radically new perspective on these events, and/or advocate new and more effective modes of combating the occupation, and/or have the potential to influence public opinion in the right direction.

In view of the above-mentioned proliferation, it is astonishing that in his new book, in Israel’s Occupation, Neve Gordon can claim with apparent accuracy that an “overview of the occupation” is “something that has not yet been done.”

Described by the inimitable Alan Dershowitz as “a despicable example of a self-hating Jew and a self-hating Israeli,” Gordon is an academic who, having been seriously wounded during his military service on Israel’s northern border, became director of Physicians for Human Rights and an active member of the Arab/Jewish partnership Ta’ayush. In view of these facts, and Gordon’s professed “passionate commitment to Israel” (The Nation, 12 May 2008), Dershowitz’s rabid verbal slavering seems more mischievous than ever. While advancing in roughly chronological order, Gordon organizes his chapters around specific themes: “The Infrastructure of Control,” “The Invisible Occupation,” “Identification Trouble,” “The Intifada,” “The Separation Principle,” and so forth.

Israel’s Occupation, however, is less a conventional history than a carefully argued critique of the statist illusions of traditional commentary. By “statism” Gordon means a view of “the Israeli state as a free agent issuing policies unhindered by contingencies” and of Palestinian resistance as “led by people who stand in some free zone and whose beliefs and actions have not been shaped by the occupation and Israel’s controlling apparatuses.” As against this, he proposes a “genealogy of Israel’s forms of control and an analysis of how they interact …, suggest[ing] that the excesses and contradictions engendered by the controlling apparatuses help … shift the emphasis among the modes of power … shap[ing] Israel’s policy choices and Palestinian resistance.” Confusingly, the word “excesses” here means something like “unintended consequences.” Perhaps no single theme resonates with more monotonous emphasis throughout the book than the fact that Israel’s ill-considered actions since 1967 have consistently “blown back” in its face. Indeed even when it succeeded in its aims, that success rapidly morphed into something unanticipated and unwelcome to the occupier, cursed as it is with that inability to learn from history so characteristic of imperial and colonial regimes. The consequent shattering of Palestinian society into “warlordism, a la Somalia” is ultimately “inimical to [Israel’s] own interests.”

Gordon divides the course of the occupation into five periods. At first the military government (1967-80) sought to improve the standard of living of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, not from altruism but in order to “normalize” the occupation while simultaneously producing the illusion that it was temporary.

Secondly, the misnamed Civil Administration (1981-1987) “represented Israel’s recognition that the methods it had hitherto employed to normalize the occupation … were not working” as well as an “admission that the occupation was not temporary.”

Thirdly, the first Palestinian intifada (1987-1993) was a response to the contradiction “between Israel’s insistence that the Palestinians manage themselves … and its ongoing efforts to repress all manifestations of Palestinian nationalism.” Rabin’s “iron fist” policy “was, paradoxically, a sign of the failure of existing forms of control … since power is tolerable only insofar as it manages to hide part of itself …” (one of Michel Foucault’s more straightforward insights).

Fourthly, the Oslo years (1994-2000) represented Israel’s attempt to “outsource the occupation” by turning the newly created Palestinian Authority into a “sub-contractor.” Gordon is magnificently scathing about Oslo, which “managed to undo the intifada’s most important achievements” by causing “the disappearance of vigorous popular and civil movements” and by “normalizing” the occupation all over again.

Most recently, the second Palestinian intifada saw Israel suspending all legality — including its own draconian and inherently lawless laws — in order to brutally crush Palestinian resistance and, in effect, to transfer responsibility for the welfare of the population from the PA to various charity organizations. Taking his cue from Foucault and the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, Gordon analyzes Israel’s controlling apparatuses and practices in terms of three fundamental modes of power: “disciplinary, bio-, and sovereign.” Since these modes bleed into one another, the philosophically innocent reader may find their attribution to Israel’s successive practices somewhat confusing. The broadest progression (or regression), however, is from a “politics of life” (which nonetheless entailed much killing) in the wake of 1967, to the present “destruction of the infrastructure of existence” in which the Palestinian is reduced to homo sacer, someone “who can be killed without it being considered a crime” (Agamben). In further defining this progression/regression as one “from colonization to separation,” Gordon is again taking risks with his terminology. If colonization “attempts to manage the lives of the colonized inhabitants while exploiting the captured territory’s resources,” separation interests itself solely “in the resources” without “in any way … assum[ing] responsibility for the people.” But it is misleading to suggest that the latter is different in essence from the former, constituting as it does merely a different modality of colonization. Gordon implicitly concedes as much when he uses the phrase “colonial project” for Israel’s occupation as a whole.

There are those who will query Gordon’s decision to focus on the consequences of the 1967 war, despite his acknowledgment that “the Israeli-Palestinian conflict cannot be reduced to the military occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem” and that “one cannot understand the current disputes … without taking into account the ethnic cleansing that took place during and after the 1948 War.” With some chutzpah he asserts that “I am interested in interrogating how the Israeli military occupation has operated rather than examining the root causes of and possible solutions to the conflict.” Nonetheless, on the last page he tells us that:

“… the key to solving the conflict is by addressing the structural incongruities of the occupation, the most important of which is the distinction Israel has made between the Palestinians and their land. Once Israel relates to the two as one inseparable unit, a just and peaceful solution can evolve …”

This tight-lipped formulation may evoke nods from academics, but will hardly energize activists. Gordon has undoubtedly deepened our understanding of the occupation, and for this he is to be commended — the sentimental adage “to understand is to forgive” has no application here. But, to paraphrase Marx, the point is not merely to understand the occupation, but to terminate it.

Saree Makdisi’s book, Palestine Inside Out: An Everyday Occupation, is a very different proposition. The author is a professor of English and comparative literature at UCLA. He suggests that his scholarly “concern … with the play of language and politics” in English “nineteenth-century poems and novels” has “served [him] well in reading and writing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which the interplay of language and politics has a special … importance.”

One’s suspicion that such a conviction might be disingenuous evaporates on learning that Makdisi is a nephew of the late great Edward Said, whose cultural concerns were so similar. Furthermore, the tightly-knit (“symphonic”) structure of this book suggests that Makdisi has inherited some of his uncle’s musicianship. There are four “movements” of varying length, symmetrically entitled “Outsides,” “Insides,” “Outside In,” and “Inside Out,” preceded by an Introduction and Coda, and punctuated (“cadentially”) by series of statistics qualified as “Occupation by the Numbers” (6 series), and “Dispossession, Segregation, and Inequality by the Numbers.”

One can see further parallels between the two intellectuals when Makdisi writes that he has “become far too used to being an outsider ever to feel entirely comfortable as an ‘insider’ identifying completely with any group or nation.” Nonetheless, a few pages from the end this United States citizen refers to “many Palestinians (including myself) …” The sense of self-discovery discreetly conveyed as Makdisi’s text progresses is one of its many incidental (or not so incidental) pleasures.

This word, however, must be severely qualified. Recently, when Amazon requested a review of Palestine Inside Out from me, I wrote that “[t]here were times when Makdisi’s sober, understated account of intolerable injustice forced me to put the book down; sometimes I didn’t take it up again for days — but I always did take it up again.” This was practically a white lie, as I did not confess to having fast-read — or even skipped — some of Makdisi’s more horrendous accounts of Palestinian suffering, which are drawn both from personal encounters and “affidavits documented and published by human rights organizations …, or the Israeli veterans’ organization Shovrim Shtika (Breaking the Silence) …” Most unbearable, and almost unreadable, are the stories of sick people prevented from accessing necessary hospital treatment by Israel’s arbitrary checkpoint regime, and his account of the insane vengeance wreaked on Nablus during “Operation Defensive Shield” in 2002.

When The Electronic Intifada asked me to contribute this review, I at first refused, realizing that I would have to start the book from scratch and skip nothing. Having relented, I can only corroborate what I originally wrote: “Makdisi’s book presented the stark facts of Israeli occupation with such vividness that I felt I was learning them — and raging and weeping at them — for the first time.” Palestine Inside Out is not a history of the occupation, or of the 1948 ethnic cleansing, but a detailed exploration of the everyday lives of ordinary people exposed to the ravages of a sadistic colonial project, into which Makdisi manages with great ingenuity to weave all the relevant historical facts as well as a plethora of information about the legal and illegal structures of Israel’s occupation.

His ultimate purpose is to demonstrate that Israel has destroyed the option of a two-state solution (“a geophysical impossibility”) which it never really desired in the first place. Consequently, moving beyond description to prescription, Makdisi advocates a single democratic state, specifically proposing that the constitution drawn up in 2007 by Adalah, the Legal Center for Minority Rights in Israel, should be treated as “a draft constitution for one democratic and secular state — a bilingual and multicultural state — in all of historic Palestine … in which Jews and Palestinian Arabs could live together as equal citizens.”

Makdisi is not the first author to make this kind of proposal, nor the first to narrate the dire history that has led him to espouse it. Indeed in one sense there is absolutely nothing new in Palestine Inside Out. And yet it is a uniquely inspiring book, and one that deserves to become the standard source book both for those who know nothing about “the conflict,” and those who know too much for their own peace of mind. A heartbreaking masterpiece and one that, one hopes, may contribute towards influencing public opinion — even in the US — in support of justice for the Palestinians.

Raymond Deane is an Irish composer and activist (



One of the The fruits of Oslo was doubling the Jewish settlements over 10 years and creation of a ZIONIST AUTHORITY in WB, (The Promised Land of Uprooted Palestinians ).

Israel settlers on Acre started the Process of “Right of return” to PA land, while their fellow Settlers in WB are doing the same in West bank
forcing the right of return of WB Palestinians to the “The Promised Land in Gaza” and Pharaoh is massing his security forces to prevent the Return to the Sinai

Hamas was right in saying: Jewish assaults on Palestinians in Akre one of the fruits of Annapolis conference which was held last November and tried to consolidate the concept of 1948-occupied Palestine being the homeland for the Jews, encouraging more racism against 1948-Palestinians who already suffer from being treated as second class citizens. Ramon said it: Recognition of a “Jewish state” important as it means no right of return. One of the eight points document was clearly talking about mutual exchange of people and lands between the Israeli occupation government and the PA.
Livni is looking forward to a Palestinian state absorbing all refugees,
Settlers in Akre got the message and since 5 days are heping the Palestinian “Refugee” in Acre, to return to their home land.

It’s a conspiracy, blessed by European, US, Israeli, PA, and Moderate Arabs against the Palestinians who decided to stay, the “strategic threat to the Hebrew state”,

Israeli Attacks against Arabs Enter 5th Day in Acre
Readers Number : 36


Israeli settlers’ attacks against Arabs of the northern city of Acre carried on in its fifth day despite the massive presence of Israeli police forces deployed in an effort to counter the clashes that began on the eve of Yom Kippur.

Police fired water cannons to disperse stone-throwing rioters in Acre, a former Crusader stronghold, arresting 32 from both sides on a day when three Arab homes were also torched and damaged, an Israeli police spokesman said.

On Saturday, leaders of the Arab community met with Northern District Police chief Cmdr. Shimon Koren and the head of the Acre police station.

They agreed that the Arab leaders would publicly condemn the driver who sparked the riots when he drove into an Israeli neighborhood late Wednesday night on the eve of Yom Kippur.

MK Abbas Zakour (United Arab List) said the Arab leadership in the city met on Saturday morning and discussed ways to avoid similar violence in the future.

On Saturday evening, representatives of the Jewish and Arab communities met to devise a plan to restore peace to the town.

An Arab family’s house was set ablaze on Saturday night. No casualties were reported but the house sustained serious damage.

Two Arab-owned apartments in the Israeli, eastern section of Acre were torched on Friday night.

Israeli Police said on Saturday evening that the city was under control, despite criticism that not enough rioters had been arrested.

“We shall remain like a wall upon your chest, and in your throat like a shard of glass.” —Excerpt from Tawfiq Ziad’s “Here We Will Stay”

The right of no return

Salah: There is a conspiracy against Palestinians in 1948-occupied Palestine

[ 12/10/2008 – 10:49 AM ]

UM AL-FAHAM, (PIC)– The prominent Muslim leader in the 1948-occupied Palestinian lands Sheikh Raed Salah has warned Saturday of a conspiracy that aims at displacing Palestinian citizens from their homeland in the 1948-occupied lands.
Salah, who was speaking to the Quds Press, said that this conspiracy is supported by regional and international parties. He explained that talk of exchanging lands and people between the Israeli occupation government and the PA negotiation panels persisted in this regard despite the strong objection from the Palestinian people.

He also accused the Israeli occupation government of dealing with the Palestinians living in the 1948-occupied lands as “strategic threat to the Hebrew state”, and not as full-fledged citizens as Israel always alleges.

Moreover, Salah underlined that the Palestinians in the 1948-occupied lands were and still are suffering racial and religious discrimination at the hands of the successive Israeli occupation governments since 1948.

“Whoever reads the eight-point document that was achieved in Annapolis, could easily see that one of those points was clearly talking about mutual exchange of people and lands between the Israeli occupation government and the PA, which was also backed by European, US, Israeli, Palestinian, and Arab blessing.

“This is a clear indication that there was an attempt to create international, Palestinian, and Arab harmony to implement the Israeli policy of “transfer” of the Palestinian citizens in the 1948-occupied lands although others would like to use deceiving terms for that abhorred policy”, Salah underscored, highlighting the danger of such policy on the Palestinian people.

He also pointed out that the attempts on the part of the Israeli security apparatuses to penetrate the Palestinian community in the 1948-occupied lands indicate that vision, ambition, and thinking of many Palestinian institutions working there have become more mature.

Salah was detained more than once in the past for his strong stands against the Israeli plans to Judaize Jerusalem city and the Aqsa Mosuqe, in addition to sealing off the Aqsa Foundation, which he headed, on orders of Israeli war minister Ehud Barak a couple of months ago.

Where water leaves a bitter taste

Ramesh Jaura, The Electronic Intifada, 8 October 2008

Palestinians from Kfar Qaddum village near the West Bank city of Qalqilya fill up water from a reservoir, August 2006. (Khaleel Reash/MaanImages)

BARCELONA (IPS/Terraviva) – Palestinian villagers drink unsafe agricultural water rather than trusting water provided by an Israeli company, says Buthaina Mizyed, who has worked in Arraneh village near the conflict-laden West Bank city of Jenin.

The reason the Palestinians avoid the water from a station in the nearby village of al-Jalameh is that it smells of chlorine. So deep is the mistrust of Israelis that they fear it might have been contaminated, and would damage their children’s health.

“We assured them that water from the al-Jalameh station is being constantly tested and that its quality is definitely better than that of the water from the agricultural wells,” says Mizyed. “But they would not believe us. They said the water could be contaminated in the time gaps between one quality test and another. They would ask us to guarantee water provided by the Israeli company was safe. But of course we could not guarantee.”

Mizyed related this at a daylong event on “the inequality of groundwater allocation: the Palestinian-Israeli case” organized at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona on Tuesday.

But the Palestinians’ mistrust is not unfounded, says a report presented at the event by Ayman Rabi, director of the Palestinian Hydrology Group, a non-governmental organization based in Jerusalem.

“Israeli colonies discharge their untreated wastewater into Palestinian land, causing serious pollution threat to water resources,” says Rabi. An engineer by profession, Rabi has worked on several projects funded by the European Commission and NGOs in Europe.

The report found that industrial Israeli colonies in the West Bank are causing serious damage to groundwater sources and polluting land. It underlines the inequalities of water allocation that plague the region.

“The inequalities are so obvious, but unfortunately the media hardly ever take note of these,” Rabi told IPS. “The unequal allocation of a rightful share for Palestinians from their groundwater resources has kept them underdeveloped over the past 60 years.

“In arid environments such as the Middle East, water is considered a major factor for stability and prosperity for all people. For this stability to happen people who live under similar climate and hydrologic conditions must be treated equally in terms of their rights and needs for water.”

Palestinians are allocated no more than 8.2 percent of the total available water resources in the region, while Israel is using 57.1 percent and Jordan 34.7 percent. The amount allocated to Palestinians does not reflect needs, says Rabi.

The study says 44 percent of domestic water Palestinians need is supplied from local sources, while 56 percent is purchased from Israel.

Rabi points out that Israel has over the decades maintained full control over water resources in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and refused to allocate the rightful share for Palestinians.

“Israel drilled hundreds of wells next to the Green Line to capture all the water coming from the Western Aquifer Basin,” the study says.

The “Green Line” refers to the 1949 armistice lines established between Israel and its neighbors Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. The Green Line separates Israel not only from these countries but from territories Israel later occupied in 1967, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula (which has since been returned to Egypt). The term “Green Line” is derived from the green ink used to draw the line on the map during the talks.

According to the study, “Israel continued to confiscate more land for building settlements to control recharge areas.”

The number of settlers increased from 20,000 in the 1970s to more than 450,000 today. And with this, their water needs.

Rabi warns that while the demand for water continues to increase, driven by population growth and economic development, the Middle East could be the first region to cope with a dramatically reduced amount of water.

The situation is already alarming. Salinity is rising in major water courses such as the Euphrates, and half the population of the region’s large cities lacks adequate drinking water supply.

But what if the countries in the Middle East had no choice but to get along in order to share the region’s meagre water resources?

This is the starting premise of Jon Martin Trondalen’s book Water and Peace for the People launched last month at the United Nations Educational and Scientific Organization (UNESCO) headquarters in Paris.

The book suggests concrete ways to resolve these crises. Analyzing what is at stake in each situation while making public new information, the author examines the conflicts over the Upper Jordan River between Israel and Syria around the Golan Heights, between Israel and Lebanon over the Wazzani Spring, and the longstanding water dispute between Palestinians and Israelis. Challenges confronting Turkey, Syria and Iraq in sharing water of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers are also assessed.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service (2008). Total or partial publication, retransmission or sale forbidden.

Same shit, different pile

Third-Party Blues

Posted on Oct 9, 2008

AP photo / Jim Bourg, pool

By Scott Ritter

The war in Iraq has morally crippled the Republican Party, if not all of America. The fact that a conflict which has taken the lives of more than 4,150 Americans to date, wounded tens of thousands more, and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians serves as the centerpiece of the Republican Party platform boggles the mind. As a lifelong registered Republican, I have been torn apart by the immoral embrace of the Iraq war by members of a political movement which at one time seemed to pride itself as being the defender of a strong America built on the ideals and values enshrined in the Constitution.

With such feelings, I found myself headed to the 2008 Republican convention, where I was invited to speak to the Veterans for Peace and other groups, a committed supporter of Barack Obama. I was somewhat surprised at how my opinions and attitudes were changed by the experience.

I landed in Minneapolis in time to watch John McCain introduce his newly selected running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, to the United States. Like many other Americans, I was struck by how little I knew of her. I listened intently as she spoke, and was taken aback not by what she said (it was standard political fare) but rather by how the crowd reacted. One moment in particular concerned me: When Palin stated that her eldest son, 19 years of age, had enlisted in the Army and was soon to be deployed to Iraq, the crowd erupted in wild cheers of “USA! USA! USA!,” as if the mother of five had announced that her son just beat the Russians at hockey. That Sarah Palin stood there, taking in the cheers with a smile, only underscored the fact that she herself had no appreciation of the gravity of the situation, and the reality of what her son was getting into. Her son’s service to his nation had been marginalized into little more than a campaign prop, his patriotism debased by a crowd of political supporters who knew little of the reality of war and instead treated it as some perverse form of national sport. One only hopes that Palin will not have to learn how it feels to be the parent of a wounded vet, or worse, a Gold Star Mother. Would she think back on that moment when she allowed her son’s courage to be demeaned by an act of partisan selfishness?

I might have seen this sort of thing coming. In April 2001, at the invitation of Rep. Jack Kingston, I spoke before the Theme Team, a collection of influential Republican congressional representatives. The topic was Iraq, and in particular Iraq’s status as a threat worthy of war. I argued that the United States must exhaust all options, especially resolving the weapons of mass destruction issue through inspections, before there could be any talk of war with Iraq. I provided the assembled Republicans, and their respective staffers, with an in-depth analysis (derived from my June 2000 article, “The Case for the Qualitative Disarmament of Iraq,” published in Arms Control Today) of what I deemed to be the current state of affairs concerning Iraqi WMD, and I warned the Theme Team that any push for war against Iraq based upon the exaggeration of a WMD threat would come back to haunt the Republican Party. As a fellow Republican who had voted for President George W. Bush, I told them, I was loath to see America under Republican leadership head down that path. My advice was not heeded. While Rep. Kingston and his fellow Republicans were receptive, thanking me for my testimony (which they claimed was “enlightening”), the Theme Team backed, and continues to back, President Bush’s disastrous decisions on Iraq.

It is with this consistent support for the Iraq war from the heart of the Republican Party in mind that one must judge John McCain’s stubborn insistence on staying the course. Long deemed a “maverick” for his tendency to run afoul of mainstream politics, on Iraq McCain has been anything but. With the presidency clearly in his sights, McCain has retreated to politically comfortable turf. He has a résumé of military service of such merit that no one dares challenge the former prisoner of war’s status as a “true American hero,” and he has built his campaign and, by extension, his party, around the themes of “military service” and “service to country.” His enthusiasm for the invasion of Iraq has been matched by his support for a continuation of the mission there through to completion and victory. In this, McCain staked out the once-lonely position of supporting a “surge” in U.S. combat strength in Iraq, standing nearly alone in 2006-2007 while most others, Democrat and Republican alike, were considering options for the reduction of U.S. force levels in Iraq, if not their outright withdrawal. McCain has staked his campaign on this support of the “surge,” coupled with the subsequent reduction of violence in Iraq. It is his strongest argument that he is a leader capable of seeing America through these difficult times.

The illusion is almost perfect. Even I, at times, am left wondering, in the face of the policy vacuum coming out of the Obama camp, whether or not McCain has gotten this one right. I have to admit to having a soft spot for John McCain. His story as rebel naval aviator and courageous prisoner of war is well known to anyone who has studied the Vietnam War and its many profiles in courage. As a junior congressman from Arizona, McCain had the courage to confront President Ronald Reagan about the lack of a viable mission for the U.S. Marines in Lebanon, before the Marine barracks were blown up by a suicide bomber. In 1998, it was John McCain who came to my defense during my testimony before the U.S. Senate, following a contemptuous assault on my viability as a witness by none other than Sen. Joe Biden (more on that later). In 2000, I counted myself among the ranks of the “McCainiacs,” infatuated by the “straight-talk express” and hopeful for some real change in Washington, following what I believed to be eight ineffective years of the Clinton administration. In fact, McCain is the only presidential candidate I have ever donated money to (although the $50 check I sent following his victory in the New Hampshire primary almost assuredly went unnoticed). But then came South Carolina, and the debacle at Bob Jones University. The absolute caving in by McCain to the religious right of America, and his unconditional surrender to the presidential ambitions of George W. Bush, left me and other “McCainiacs” feeling empty, and the “straight talk express” nothing more than a mangled wreck on the American political highway. I have never trusted John McCain since, and it is with that opportunism in mind that I so dimly assess his much touted “surge” strategy.

1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE >>>


The choice between McCain and Obama is a choice between a surge in Iraq and a surge in Afghanistan. You get to choose.
Posted by As’ad at 6:43 AM

The Greatest Story Never Told

The Greatest Story Never Told

  • “There can be no peace without law. And there can be no law if we were to invoke one code of conduct for those who oppose us and another for our friends” –President Dwight Eisenhower

How can it be that International Law is applied only to who the United States chooses? If you take a look at thirty years of United States vetoes at the UN you get a sense of a certain bias, a bias reflected in the latest veto concerning the Israeli Apartheid Wall, as it often happens the sole veto. Selective justice is not justice.

Could selective justice be why the US and Israel are seen by many to be the largest threats to world peace?

  • David Ben Gurion, wrote to his son 11 years before the birth of the Jewish state: “Negev land is reserved for Jewish citizens whenever and wherever they want. We must expel the Arabs and take their place.” By 1951, fewer than 13,000 inhabitants remained of a community that numbered somewhere between 70,000 and 90,000 in the late 1940s.

In Israel another people that suffer for State want of their land are the semi-nomadic Bedouins. Although they have lived on their lands for 1000 years or more the state of Israel create retroactive zoning laws classifying the areas of their villages “non-residential”, making the Bedoins traditional homesites illegal. It also allows the Israeli government not provide essential services such as electricity, water and sanitation. Since there are no municipalities, these people cannot get a license to build. Their traditional proofs of ownership are not recognized by Israeli courts. These citizens are also subject to having their homes destroyed so they can be moved to cramped towns where they cannot practice their traditional way of life.

  • The Bedouin who had not fled or been terrorized from their tribal lands during the war were “transferred” in the 1950s, either to the center of the country, to ghettoes attached to towns like Ramle and Lod, where many work as low-wage manual laborers. furthermore The Negev area in which the Bedouin were concentrated came to be known as the “siege zone”: a ring of Jewish settlements was established to contain the Bedouin, while their lands were further whittled away through the construction of industrial areas, more military zones and conservation parks, and an airport. Each village was encircled and separated from its neighbors by new Jewish farms, settlements or development towns. Today the Bedouin, a quarter of the Negev’s population, occupy just 2 percent of its land.

Negez is home to Israel’s Nuclear Reactor, as well as the states Nuclear arsenal. WMD’s for short.

  • PM Ben Gurion consistently refused to allow international inspections. The final resolution was a commitment from Israel to use the facility for peaceful purposes, and an agreement to admit a US inspection team once a year. These inspections, begun in 1962 and continued until 1969, were only shown the above-ground part of the buildings, which continued down many levels underground. The above ground areas had simulated control rooms, and access to the underground areas was kept bricked up while the inspectors where present.

The government of Israel had atomic weapons by 1967 or ’69 depending on the source of information. Israel now has submarines carrying US supplied Harpoon cruise missiles fitted with nuclear warheads

  • “Why should I move into a recognized village. My family has been on this land since before the Turks came, before the British, before the Israelis. There are 1,500 Bedouin buried in our family plot, that’s how long we have been here,” — Abu Jledan

The man quoted above has to deal with punitive measures dealt out by the so called “Green Patrol” a paramilitary “environmental” group founded by then agricultural minister Ariel Sharon to destroy homes and confiscate Bedouin livestock. They also oversee the spraying of these people’s food crops with herbicide.

Just so you are clear; the folks suffering all this at the hands of Israel are not the people who’s plight is so easily palmed off with the epithet “Terrorist”. Yet these indigenous souls suffer the same blatant disregard for property rights, human rights and life itself.

  • But the native never lost his “last spark of hope”. The spark was not extinguished in 1948, when 750,000 Palestinians were terrorized, uprooted and expelled, several decades after Moshe Sharret announced, “We have not come to an empty land but we have come to conquer a country from people inhabiting it“; several years after David Ben-Gurion declared, “I support compulsory transfer. I do not see anything immoral in it”; and several months after Menachem Begin gloated over “a splendid act of conquest ” the rape and massacre of 254 Palestinians at Deir Yassin. The spark was not extinguished in 1967, when Israel grabbed the remaining 22% of Palestine and began its military occupation as its war hero Moshe Dayan kindly informed the natives, “You shall continue to live like dogs.”
  • “Possession is nine-tenths of the law,” says Michael Jankelowitz, liaison to foreign media for the Jewish Agency for Israel, the chief overseas beneficiary of the North American federation system that is helping Israel finance the plan.

How blind, how morally blind need one be to miss the irony of that statement? And why does the truth about land issues not appear in the media? Imagine the ruckus to be raised if we in America had a paramilitary environmental group. And rightly so I’d have to say if the paramilitary groups main focus was collective punishment that had a rascist genocidal focus. What does it say about a country that claims to be a Democracy that only grants full citizenship with all it’s benefits to only one group of its population? That practices collective punishment that includes the destruction of homes as well as food crops?

We in America need to be aware of the truth in these matters. As the UN and the Palestinian people push for peace the Likud party of Ariel Sharon defies the will of that world wide Democratic body, the very Democratic body that breathed life into the dreams of Zionists for a homeland in Palestine by creating Israel in 1948; to grasp at land and water resources that International law clearly states belongs to the people it always has. The people who lived on that soil for untold generations. And our US tax dollars help enable this.When Tom Delay can say

you are hearing a denial of International Law, of UN Mandate and it should trouble you. I have heavily linked this post so you can use it as a learning tool. “A land without people for a people without land” is a propaganda slogan widely circulated. Learn the truth behind the headlines. Politicians crave PAC money for their campaigns from people with a bent not for justice but for domination. For land but not life. Stand up for the truth.

  • Tricks and Treachery are the practice of fools who don’t have the brains to be honest”–Benjamin Franklin

posted by m at 10:49 PM Comments (6)

This is Zionism: The Lavon Affair

Another Mossad False Flag Operation

NOTICE: Please Read!

By David Hirst, Excerpts from his book: The Gun and the Olive Branch, 1977, 1984, Futura Publications

In July 1954 Egypt was plagued by a series of bomb outrages directed mainly against American and British property in Cairo and Alexandria. It was generally assumed that they were the work of the Moslem Brothers, then the most dangerous challenge to the still uncertain authority of Colonel (later President) Nasser and his two-year-old revolution. Nasser was negotiating with Britain over the evacuation of its giant military bases in the Suez Canal Zone, and, the Moslem Brothers, as zealous nationalists, were vigorously opposed to any Egyptian compromises.

It therefore came as a shock to world, and particularly Jewish opinion, when on 5 October the Egyptian Minister of the Interior, Zakaria Muhieddin, announced the break-up of a thirteen-man Israeli sabotage network. An ‘anti-Semitic’ frame-up was suspected.

Indignation increased when, on 11 December, the group was brought to trial. In the Israeli parliament, Prime Minister Moshe Sharett denounced the ‘wicked plot hatched in Alexandria … the show trial which is being organized there against a group of Jews who have fallen victims to false accusations and from whom it seems attempts are being made to extract confessions of imaginary crimes, by threats and torture . . .’49 The trade union newspaper Davar observed that the Egyptian regime ‘seems to take its inspiration from the Nazis’ and lamented the ‘deterioration in the status of Egyptian Jews in general’.50 For Ha’aretz the trial ‘proved that the Egyptian rulers do not hesitate to invent the most fantastic accusations if it suits them’; it added that ‘in the present state of affairs in Egypt the junta certainly needs some diversions’.51 And the next day the Jerusalem Post carried this headline: ‘Egypt Show Trial Arouses Israel, Sharett Tells House. Sees Inquisition Practices Revived.’

The trial established that the bombings had indeed been carried out by an Israeli espionage and terrorist network. This was headed by Colonel Avraharn Dar –alias John Darling– and a core of professionals who had set themselves up in Egypt under various guises. They had recruited a number of Egyptian Jews; one of them was a young woman, Marcelle Ninio, who worked in the offices of a British company. Naturally, the eventual exposure of such an organization was not going to improve the lot of the vast majority of Egyptian Jews who wanted nothing to do with Zionism. There were still at least 50,000 Jews in Egypt; there had been something over 60,000 in 1947, more than half of whom were actually foreign nationals. During the first Arab-Israeli war of 1948, the populace had some times vented its frustration against them, and some were killed in mob violence or by terrorist bombs. In spite of this, and of the revolutionary upheaval which followed four years later, few Jews-including the foreign nationals-left the country, and fewer still went to Israel. A Jewish journalist insisted: ‘We, Egyptian Jews, feel secure in our homeland, Egypt.’52

The welfare of Oriental Jewry in their various homelands was, as we have seen, Israel’s last concern. And in July 1954 it had other worries. It was feeling isolated and insecure. Its Western friends-let alone the rest of the world-were unhappy about its aggressive behaviour. The US Assistant Secretary of State advised it to ‘drop the attitude of the conqueror’.53 More alarming was the rapprochement under way between Egypt, on the one hand, and the United States and Britain on the other. President Eisenhower had urged Britain to give up her giant military base in the Suez Canal Zone; Ben-Gurion had failed to dissuade her. It was to sabotage this rapprochement that the head of Israeli intelligence, Colonel Benyamin Givli, ordered his Egyptian intelligence ring to strike.

Givli’s boss, Defence Minister Pinhas Lavon, and the Prime Minister, Moshe Sharett, knew nothing of the operation. For Givli was a member of a powerful Defence Ministry clique which often acted independently, or in outright defiance, of the cabinet. They were proteges of Ben-Gurion and, although ‘The Old Man’ had left the Premiership for Sde Boker, his Negev desert retreat, a few months before, he was able, through them, to perpetuate the hardline ‘activist’ policies in which he believed. On Givli’s instructions, the Egyptian network was to plant bombs in American and British cultural centres, British-owned cinemas and Egyptian public buildings. The Western powers, it was hoped, would conclude that there was fierce internal opposition to the rapprochement and that Nasser’s young r6gime,faced with this challenge, was not one in which they could place much confidence.54 Mysterious violence might therefore persuade both London and Washington that British troops should remain astride the Canal; the world had not forgotten Black Saturday, 28 January 1951, in the last year of King Farouk’s reign, when mobs rampaged through downtown Cairo, setting fire to foreign-owned hotels and shops, in which scores of people, including thirteen Britons, died.

The first bomb went off, on 2 July, in the Alexandria post office. On 11 July, the Anglo-Egyptian Suez negotiations, which had been blocked for nine months, got under way again. The next day the Israeli embassy in London was assured that, up on the British evacuation from Suez, stock-piled arms would not be handed over to the Egyptians. But the Defence Ministry activists were unconvinced. On 14 July their agents, in clandestine radio contact with Tel Aviv, fire-bombed US Information Service libraries in Cairo and Alexandria. That same day, a phosphorous bomb exploded prematurely in the pocket of one Philip Natanson, nearly burning him alive, as he was about to enter the British-owned Rio cinema in Alexandria. His arrest and subsequent confession led to the break-up of the whole ring-but not before the completion of another cycle of clandestine action and diplomatic failure. On 15 July President Eisenhower assured the Egyptians that ‘simultaneously’ with the signing of a Suez agreement the United States would enter into ‘firm commitments’ for economic aid to strengthen their armed forces.55 On 23 July –anniversary of the 1952 revolution– the Israeli agents still at large had a final fling; they started fires in two Cairo cinemas, in the central post office and the railway station. On the same day, Britain announced that the War Secretary, Antony Head, was going to Cairo. And on 27 July he and the Egyptians initiated the ‘Heads of Agreement’ on the terms of Britain’s evacuation.

The trial lasted from 11 December to 3 January. Not all the culprits were there, because Colonel Dar and an Israeli colleague managed to escape, and the third Israeli, Hungarian-born Max Bennett, committed suicide; but those who were present all pleaded guilty. Most of them, including Marcelle Ninio, were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. But Dr Musa Lieto Marzuk, a Tunisian-born citizen of France who was a surgeon at the Jewish Hospital in Cairo, and Samuel Azar, an engineering professor from Alexandria, were condemned to death. In spite of representations from France, Britain and the United States the two men were hanged. Politically, it would have been very difficult for Nasser to spare them, for only seven weeks before six Moslem Brothers had been executed for complicity in an attempt on his life. Nevertheless Israel reacted with grief and anger. So did some Western Jews. Marzuk and Azar ‘died the death of martyrs’, said Sharett on the same day in the Knesset, whose members stood in silent tribute. Israel went into official mourning the following day. Beersheba and Ramat Gan named streets after the executed men. Israeli delegates to the Egyptian-Israeli Mixed Armistice Commission refused to attend its meeting, declaring that they would not sit down with representatives of the Cairo junta. In New York there were bomb threats against the Egyptian consulate and a sniper fired four shots into its fourth-floor window.56

This whole episode, which was to poison Israeli political life for a decade and more, came to be known as the ‘Lavon Affair’, for it had been established in the Cairo trial that Lavon, as Minister of Defence, had approved the campaign of sabotage. At least so the available evidence made it appear. But in Israel, Lavon had asked Moshe Sharett for a secret inquiry into a matter about which the cabinet knew nothing. Benyamin Givli, the intelligence chief, claimed that the so-called ‘security operation’ had been authorized by Lavon himself. Two other Ben-Gurion protégés, Moshe Dayan and Shimon Peres, testified against Lavon. Lavon denounced Givli’s papers as forgeries and demanded the resignation of all three men. Instead, Sharett ordered Lavon himself to resign and invited Ben-Gurion to come out of retirement and take over the Defence Ministry. It was a triumphant comeback for the ‘activist’ philosophy whose excesses both Sharett and Lavon had tried to modify. It was consummated, a week later, by an unprovoked raid on Gaza, which left thirty-nine Egyptians dead and led to the Suez War of 1956.57

When the truth about the Lavon Affair came to light, six years after the event, it confirmed that there had been a frame-up; not, however, by the Egyptians, but by Ben-Gurion and his young protégés. Exposure was fortuitous. Giving evidence in a forgery trial in September 1960, a witness divulged on passant that he had seen the faked signature of Lavon on a document relating to a 1954 ‘security mishap’.58 Ben-Gurion immediately announced that the three-year statute of limitations prohibited the opening of the case. But Lavon, now head of the powerful Histradut Trade Union Federation, seized upon this opportunity to demand an inquiry. Ben-Gurion did everything in his power to stop it, but his cabinet overruled him. The investigation revealed that the security operation’ had been planned behind Lavon’s back. His signature had been forged, and the bombing had actually begun long before his approval –which he withheld– had been sought. He was a scapegoat pure and simple. On Christmas Day 1960, the Israeli cabinet unanimously exonerated him of all guilt in the ‘disastrous security adventure in Egypt’; the Attorney General had, in the meantime, found ‘conclusive evidence of forgeries as well as false testimony in an earlier inquiry’.59 Ben-Gurion was enraged. He issued an ultimatum to the ruling Labour party to remove Lavon, stormed out of a cabinet meeting and resigned. In what one trade unionist described as ‘an immoral and unjust submission to dictatorship’, his diehard supporters in the Histradut swung the vote in favour of accepting Lavon’s resignation. Lavon, however, won a moral victory over the man who twice forced him from office. In the streets of Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, students demonstrated in his favour. They carried placards reading: ‘Bengurion Go to Sde Boker, Take Dayan and Peres with You. We do Not Accept Leaders with Elastic Consciences.’60 The affair rocked the ruling establishment, split public opinion, forced new elections and contributed largely to Ben-Gurion’s eventual disappearance from public life.

But Lavon was not the only real victim. There were also those misguided Egyptian Jews who paid with their lives or long terms of imprisonment. It is true that when, in 1968, Marcelle Ninio and her colleagues were exchanged for Egyptian’ prisoners in Israel, they received a heroes’ welcome. True, too, that when Miss Ninio got married Prime Minister Golda Meir, Defence Minister Dayan and Chief of Staff General Bar Lev all attended the wedding and Dayan told the bride ‘the Six-Day War was success enough that it led to your freedom’.61 However, after spending fourteen years in an Egyptian prison, the former terrorists did not share the leadership’s enthusiasm. When Ninio and two of her colleagues appeared on Israel television a few years later, they all expressed the belief that the reason why they were not released earlier was because Israel made little effort to get them out. ‘Maybe they didn’t want us to come back,’ said Robert Dassa. ‘There was so much intrigue in Israel. We were instruments in the hands of the Egyptians and of others … and what is more painful after all that we went through is that this continues to be so.’ In Ninio’s opinion, ‘the government didn’t want to spoil its relations with the United States and didn’t want the embarrassment of admitting it was behind our action’.62

But the real victims were the great mass of Egyptian Jewry. Episodes like the Lavon Affair tended to identify them, in the mind of ordinary Egyptians, with the Zionist movement. When, in 1956, Israeli invaded and occupied Sinai, feeling ran high against them. The government, playing into the Zionist hands, began ordering Jews to leave the country. Belatedly, reluctantly, 21,000 left in the following year; more were expelled later, and others, their livelihood gone, had nothing to stay for. But precious few went to Israel.


49. Jerusalem Post, 12 December 1954.
5O. 13 December 1954.
51. 13 December 1954.
52. Berger, op. cit., p. 14.
53. Love, Kennett, Suez: The Twice-Fought War, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969, P. 71.
54. Ibid., p . 73.
55. Ibid., p. 74.
56. Love, op. cit., P. 77.
57. See p. 198.
58. New York Times, 10 February 1961.
59. Ibid
60. Jewish Chronicle, London, 17 February 1971.
61. Ha’olam Hazeh, 1 December 1971
62. Associated Press, 16 March 1975.

Israel’s “Obsession” with the Christian/Islamic Conflict

Israel’s “Obsession” with the Christian/Islamic Conflict
Mark Glenn – The Ugly Truth October 5, 2008

Israel–like a hungry vulture perched high on a tree branch watching as two enemies below go at each other’s throats until their mutual destruction brings her an easy meal–is once again up to her old tricks in keeping the artificial Islamo-Christian war she helped produce on 9/11 at the very top of her agenda.

Not content with the bloodshed (1,000,000 + deaths and counting) she has already orchestrated in Iraq and Afghanistan through her network of spies in America and elsewhere, Israel is demanding this carnage be widened to include Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, or wherever Muslims can be found in high numbers. The fact that such a war involving the industrialized Christian West (with its 1+billion inhabitants) and the oil-rich Islamic world (with its 1+billion adherents) can only end in disaster for the rest of civilization is as they say a ‘no-brainer’, and yet Israel (being the irrational, self-absorbed, obsessed character she is) continues operating under the dictum ‘My way or the highway’.

The reason for the Jewish state demanding such a war take place between the Christian and Islamic worlds is a no-brainer as well, despite the appallingly-low number of persons aware of it these days. Zionism–in contravention to the high-minded rhetoric its supporters use in trying to ‘lipstick’ a pig to 1st place in a beauty contest is not an ideology limited simply to the affairs of some tiny sliver of land on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean sea. The ideology driving the great experiment in Jewish self-rule is fanaticism as pure and undiluted as ever such a thing existed. Based as it is upon the irrational, dangerous, and chauvinistic Old Testament fantasy that the creator of all plucked one tiny, seemingly insignificant microbe of humans out from the midst of inferior beings, set them apart and conferred upon them royal status and a mandate to rule the world, such a theme would be laughed out of town were it to involve any group of people other than the Jews.

In plainer language, what it means is that there really are nutcases in the post-enlightenment/21st century who (despite what would otherwise be the edifying and therapeutic effects of reason and common sense) nevertheless truly believe in all that nonsense about one small, backwards tribe of people destined by the Almighty to ‘inherit the earth’ and ‘make footstools’ of all their Gentile enemies.

And with these things in plain view then, the ‘reasoning’ behind Israel’s engineering of such a conflict between the Christian and Islamic worlds ceases to be any mystery. It is ‘strictly business’ as Michael Corleone said in the movie The Godfather, a case of Judaism (obsessed with its own messianic destiny and bent on world domination) having two competitors eliminate each other, leaving her the only viable player on the field.

Now, in furtherance of this obsession (and just ahead of the US presidential elections, by the way) Israel has begun ramping up things with an eye towards throwing even more gasoline on an already out-of-control fire consuming the world.

In early September the Jewish state–superficially created as ‘God’s divine remedy’ to the worst crimes mankind is disposed towards committing, (meaning bigotry, intolerance and–lest we forget, the mother of all sins–anti-Semitism) nevertheless announced it was sponsoring an upcoming festival of hatred dedicated to promoting that other form of politically-correct ‘anti-Semitism’ that no one hears anything about these days, and not just any old, run-of-the-mill anti-Semitism, but rather the ‘real McCoy’–meaning against Arabs and Muslims.

Entitled “Facing Jihad: A Lawmaker’s Summit” , the meeting is to be held at (where else?) the Knesset. To date dozens of European parliamentarians–whether for reasons of blackmail or bribery–have promised to attend. Israel–with a straight face and summoning up all the chutzpah she is legendary for possessing–announced that the purpose of the conference is (get ready for this) “the formation of a new Judeo-Christian alliance to confront the spread of Islam and the violence that inevitably follows in its wake.”

To those with eyes to see and with 3 functioning brains cells, several things concerning the upcoming Jewish/Christian kissey-face confab stick out like a whore in a red dress at a first communion ceremony, the first being the hypocrisy of it all. One need not sprain any intellectual hamstrings in imagining the howls that would echo all over God’s green earth if instead of such a conference being held at the Knesset it were held at Ahmadinejhad’s parliament and instead of being ‘Judeo-Christian’ in nature it was Christians and Muslims getting together to discuss the topic of Judaism and its megalomaniacal political arm, Zionism.

Those having difficulty imagining such howling should consider that as it is right now the rest of the Gentile world is already subjected to a daily barrage of shrieking, wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever someone from amongst the self-chosenites stubs a toe in a manner that can be blamed on hatred, prejudice or ‘anti-Semitism’.
The truth of the matter however (although NEVER discussed) is that the Jewish state is the ULTIMATE testimony to ‘anti-Semitism,’ past, present, and (most likely, considering the scope of the war against Islam) future. It is ‘Anti-Semitism Central’, the headquarters of ‘Anti-Semitism Inc’ (and in some respects similar to Ponce De Leon’s mythical spring that brought eternal youth) the fountain from which all poisonous anti-Semitic waters flow. The very existence of the Jewish state is intrinsically bound up with hatred for Semites, so much so that without it she would lose her identity and cease to exist. And lest some think this anti-Semitism on the part of the Jewish state against the native peoples living in the area is a relatively new phenomenon that began with the birth of this Frankenstein child back in the 20th century, a trip down memory lane should clear things up PDQ.

Lest it be forgotten, Israel’s hatred of Semites began with Abraham’s jealous, barren wife Sarah forcing the Semite slave girl Hagar and her son Ishmael (Abraham’s own son) to wander out into the desert in the hopes they would both die of thirst and exposure. From there it moves on to stealing all the gold and silver of the Semitic Egyptians before high-tailing it into the land ‘promised’ to them by their God Yahweh and the subsequent slaughter of every living creature (man, woman, child, sheep, goat, ox, cow, bull, etc) peaceably residing in 31 villages. And last, (but certainly not least) is the drunken, orgiastic mass murder of 75,000 innocent Persian civilians as described in the book of Esther and recounted every year in the Jewish religious festival of Purim.

And absent all of this of course there is recent history to ponder, which, when considering what has been done to the Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis and all the other true Semites in the region (to say nothing of the fact that Israel proudly claims to have developed a form of biological warfare targeting persons genetically Semitic) it can be safely assumed that the official policy of the Jewish state from the beginning is that Semites should die in as high numbers as possible.
Therefore no one should be particularly surprised to learn the Jewish state would host such a gathering of, well, for lack of a better word, Nazis. If it can be said that the despised Hitler was not the originator of racial supremacism (coupled with racial hatred of inferiors) but rather that he borrowed his ideas from someone else and then improved on them, the truth of the matter is that he was but a student and learned his ‘anti-Semitism’ from the real master, meaning the Jews and their historical hatred for the peoples of the desert.

The other facet concerning the conference statement that screams out like a smashed cat is the wording that speaks of the ‘inevitable’ violence of Islam. Besides the fact that it is a deliberate attempt on the part of Jewish interests at mischaracterizing Islam, the more important thing is the (surprise, surprise) hypocrisy of it all. In an age where all persons are expected to be ‘sensitive’ to the beliefs of others (no matter how irrational or obnoxious such beliefs are) Israel and her partisans certainly do not afford Islam or its adherents that same courtesy. Clearly what Israel is trying to affect here is the perception in the mind of the Christian world that the moral resistance the Arabs have waged against a lawless, bloodthirsty Jewish state that murders not only innocent men, women and children, but as well sheep, goat, ox, cow, bull, etc as the Israelites of old did is all a product of ‘Islamo-Fascism’ or some other non-sensical, inane Judaistic construct that cannot bear even the slightest weight of intellectual scrutiny.

And of course, last but certainly not least, is the preposterous idea that there is, was or ever could be anything akin to a ‘Judeo-Christian’ alliance of ANY sort as Israel is proposing. Of all the ‘goyim’ out there, Christians are hated the worst by the Jews and this is no theory. Jewish antagonism towards Jesus Christ, His teachings and His followers was self-evident from the very beginning when a mob of God’s chosen drove Christ to the edge of a cliff and tried to throw him over, continued throughout His 3 years of trying to rehabilitate a basically unregenerate, degenerate people and then culminated in His arrest, sham trial and murder.

Since those heady days, Judaism has taken its organic hatred for all things Christian and run it through a process of distillation and purification the results of which are plain to see today. What other religious group has its leader depicted in the annals of Judaism as a sexual pervert and the product of an illicit encounter between a Roman centurion and a menstruating prostitute named Miriam the hairdresser? Mohammed, Buddha, and the other leaders associated with the world’s greater religions are not depicted as boiling in a mixture of semen and feces as punishment for disobeying the Rebbe, nor are they mocked on a regular basis as Jesus is, both within the pages of the Jewish Talmud or in Israeli society. The very notion that such a thing as this ‘Judeo-Christian’ alliance could exist is so preposterous on its face that a rational person should laugh himself silly at the thought of it. It is like some strange creation cooked up in the lab of a mad scientist, where a wolf and sheep are brought together in the form of some hybrid that is not viable, given the organically-contradictory predator/prey natures of the two animals.

Judeo-Christian alliance? Kindly allow a translation of this strange language and the accompanying fine print for the hearing and learning impaired–

The Jews are going to give the Christian world the honor of fighting and dying for the Jewish state as her personal ‘nigga’ in much the same way as Joshua in the Old Testament decided not to exterminate the Gibeonites in exchange for them becoming ‘hewers of wood and carriers of water’ for God’s chosen people.
Now, fanning the flames of what theologians and historians alike will one day call the battle of Armageddon, Israel has been found right in the thick of furthering this unprecedented disaster. In this case, somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million DVDs of the documentary “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West” were inserted into 70 of the largest newspapers circulating in America and distributed throughout the country. Predictably, given the title of the film, the documentary features (among other things) cherry-picked scenes of Muslim children being encouraged to become suicide bombers interspersed with–surprise, surprise–half century-old footage of Nazi rallies and the obligatory constant references to Hitler and his infamous book Mein Kampf.

No one should be surprised to hear that the film and its mass distribution are the handiwork of Israeli partisans and Mossad assets. The film was written and produced by Israel’s own Rabbi Raphael Shore in 2006 under the auspices of his Mossad-connected group The Clarion Fund, a tax-exempt group linked with other Mossad-connected organizations such as CAMERA, (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) and MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute, founded by former Mossad officer that provides “translations“ of news stories appearing in Arabic-speaking countries. Further underscoring the film’s pro-Israel/anti-Islamic agenda, it features commentary from some of the ‘heavy-hitters’ in the Muslim bashing community including Alan M. Dershowitz, Steven Emerson, Brigitte Gabriel, Martin Gilbert, Caroline Glick, John Loftus, Daniel Pipes, Walid Shoebat, as well as interviews with Israeli officials.

In the event some may have forgotten, Pipes has made a name for himself as an “expert“ on Islam and is quoted saying (among many other things) quite a few memorable gems that would have brought the death sentence were it said by anyone else but a Jew about Muslims such as “All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most. West European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and not exactly maintaining Germanic standards of hygiene”, as well as his more recent (but equally infamous) “I worry very much from the Jewish point of view that the presence, and increased stature, and affluence, and enfranchisement of American Muslims…will present true dangers to American Jews.”

Again, the hypocrisy and double-standard is so thick that a 747 could be landed on it. Any other person of any other stripe saying such things about Jews would be ‘Mel Gibsoned’ into oblivion, meaning their lives run through the meat grinder. And yet, when it is done to Arabs and Muslims, not a peep, not a whimper, and particularly not since Emperium Judaica (with its comparatively insignificant figure of 12-15 million members) has like some gypsy pick-pocket stolen the term ‘anti-Semite’ solely for itself which its members employ like a well-honed/well-rehearsed/overused fake limp from an injury that never occurred whenever someone dares point out the organic and endemic shortcomings of the Jewish collective as demonstrated both by history and by current events.

Of course, tragically, many who receive the DVD in their newspaper and consume its poison will inevitably succumb to its narcotic and mind-destroying effects. Those found sitting on the fence as it were with regards to who they will vote for come November will most likely find themselves pulling the lever for McCain/Palin as the “most qualified choice” in fighting the non-existent boogey-man Jewish groups refer to as “Islamo-fascism”, not realizing that their action is but a carefully-planned maneuver as much so as a fish biting greedily down on a worm-covered hook.
What people can expect is that the film will not go into a deeper discussion of other factors as well, such as Islam’s reverence for Jesus, who is mentioned dozens of times in the Koran compared to Mohammed who is mentioned only 5. Equally though and more important is the fact that no doubt the film– despite its name, “Obsession”–will fail to explore the truly obsessive, irrational, violent, usurious religion of Judaism and its political offshoot known as Zionism, which teach that non-Jews are animals created in human form to serve the Jews and who may be treated in any manner as befits the betterment of Jewish lives. It will fail to mention that Judaism is the truest, most radical example of ‘Jihad’ that has ever existed throughout history, whether in reality or in the imaginations of obsessive minds and is bent on enslaving the world to its particular brand of “Sharia” that all hear so much about when Islam is being discussed.

And, sadly, like sheep being led to slaughter, a good number of Christians in America–although thinking they are doing “the Lord’s work” by voting for John McCain–will in effect give the vulture Israel what she wanted all along and this will wind up being signatories to their own political, cultural and, tragically, physical destruction.

As much as the ‘strictly business’ reasons for Israel’s obsession with the present Christian/Islamic war can be said to be ugly, the sad truth is that it does not end there. In ‘polite‘ societies, what is not spoken is the ‘personal’ reasons that the Jews want Islam and Christianity destroyed, and it is rooted in plain old, unsophisticated envy.

The ugly truth of the matter is that Judaism–trying to win a beauty contest with the other two beautiful gals on stage, meaning Christianity and Islam–doesn’t stand a chance. As much as the judges have been bribed and threatened to vote her in as Miss Universe, the fact is that no magic spells or potions can undo the fact that a pig in lipstick is till a pig. The religion of the Jews has nothing to show for its 3,000 year history except human misery, both on the part of it followers and its victims. People do not flock to its precepts the way they do to Christianity and Islam. All its monuments are those dedicated to the suffering of innocent people. All its major religious ceremonies deal with evils done to Gentiles. It can point to NO great civilizations and NO great discoveries that led to the betterment of mankind. All it has is a book that details the exploits of its people in robbing, cheating, and killing those who suffered the unenviable lot of living in their vicinity.

On the other hand, go anywhere in the world and the evidence of Islam as a vibrant, thriving ideology is apparent. At one time it was not just A world power, but THE world power. Through its learning and science, it brought Christian Europe out of the dark ages and helped bring forth the much-celebrated Renaissance. Indeed, civilization would not be what it is today were it not for the superior learning and culture of Islam. Dittoes with Christianity, that has over a billion followers worldwide in every country around the world. Out of the three religions originating out of the Middle East, Islam, Christianity and Judaism, the first two have contributed great things to civilization whereas Judaism has as much as possible glommed onto its more productive competitors. The Christians and Muslims do not have as THE source of their identity thousands of years of ‘poisecution’ as do the Jews. They do not have a list a mile long of all the countries where their followers have been kicked out, or, more accurately, vomited out. Not only able to stand on their own 2 feet, but able as well to contribute something to the benefit of fellow man, Judaism cannot make the same claim without some serious twisting of reality. Its followers have never been able to create a stable social system, much less a country due to the fact that it–the religion of the Jews–produces a backwards, contrarian mindset that is not conducive to cooperation, progress or political/social stability. This being the case means that the Christian and Muslim worlds that have collectively existed now for thousands of years are a thorn in the eye of ‘Judaic’ civilization that for the most part is noted only for its infamous ghettos, its organic criminality and now, as in the case of Israel, its radioactive/corrosive character and with it the tendency to make healthy political/social tissue surrounding it sick.

In other words, the pig trying to win the beauty contest–rather than compete on her own merits–instead breaks the legs of one of her competitors and throws battery acid in the face of the other in order to ‘even the odds’ in her favor. In the absence of that, she sets up a fight between the two so that at the end of it all their beauty has been marred with cuts, bruises and contusions.

Perhaps it was said best in an email to this writer a few years ago by an incautious Israeli teenager in an email he sent saying–

”I am a Jew, I am an Israeli, I am a Zionist…I am both racially and intellectually superior to you, the non-Jew. For your lies, your pathetic stupidity, and your anti-Semitism, your people will suffer under the punishment of the world’s future super-power, Israel! Jews are superior to dirty-blooded non-Jews like you. While your ancestors were sleeping with the swine in the forests of Europe, my ancestors were building the city of Jerusalem. Israel will come to be the world’s newest superpower. It is our destiny, written in the prophecies of god, written in our ambitions, written in our blood! Beware, for your kind will come to fear us. The coming 30 years will make your eyes twitch my gentile! I am a Jew, you are not. I have the privilege of having g-d by my side, as well as the world’s supreme nation. Perhaps you do not yet see that the worst is awaiting your kind, in the face of the coming Islamo-Christian War, from which my kind will arise victorious. I am only 14 years old, but I have enough wisdom to see that you are nothing but a piece of gentile filth. No matter, perhaps g-d will find it suitable that a terrorist attack will end your misery. I shall personally pray for it to be so.”
‘Obsession’–Never was there a better word in describing the fanaticism on the part of Israel and her supporters in furthering the clash of civilizations between the Christian and Islamic worlds. Let us all hope that the spell Israel has cast over the Christian world in allowing itself to be used in its own destruction wears off before it is too late, if indeed it is not already.

Rats leaving the Titanic.

Rats leaving the Titanic.

It’s a suppressed fact that Communism was Jewish, it was organised and funded by Jews, most mentionable of those were the Rothschilds. It was a period in the Soviet Union’s history that caused the deaths of at least 30 million Christian “white” Russians and a further 10 million who were starved to death in the Ukrainian Holodomor. In this Zionist controlled world we live in this matter is rarely discussed and any attempt to do so is slandered by the accusation of “anti-semitism”, instead the world is instructed to concentrate on the deeply questionable “Holocaust”.
At the end of the period of Jewish control (pre-Putin) , vast sums of money were transferred out of the USSR by wealthy Jewish Russian oligarchs mostly to the USA, UK and Israel.

The end result of this was that the Russian economy was brought to its knees and made bankrupt.

As we now know, the American financial system is also run by Jews, all 5 Governors of the Federal Reserve bank are Jewish, the 12 banks that own the Federal Reserve Bank are Jewish owned. Over the last few decades the Federal reserve have greatly increased the USA’s money supply, during the last 5 years this has grown in leaps and bounds, most recently it is estimated to be around 18% per annum. Little wonder that the US Government 3 years ago no longer produced a report called the “M3” which detailed the increase in money supply.
This increased money supply plus a persistent trade deficit with the rest of the world is the basic cause for the financial problems we are all experiencing, the cause of the “sub prime crisis” and the lack of confidence in the US dollar.

So just in the case of the USSR, funds are now being transferred out of the USA and back to the Federal reserves fatherland in Israel. I am referring to the Jewish owned banking system frantically sending, electronically, huge amounts of money to banks in Israel. Shortly before the Lehman Brother were declared bankrupt their wholly owned brokerage unit shrank to less than $100 billion in assets from $500 billion. This was due to a $400 billion transfer to Israeli Banks.

The end result is that the American taxpayers gets to pay the cost of Lehman’s bankruptcy, an estimated $639 billion whilst the bulk of Lehman’s assets sit safely in Israel.

The Zionist dream of a Greater Israel is over

Shattered dreams
The full-blown Zionist project is over. Even Israel’s prime minister admits it, writes Abdallah El-Ashaal*

At a meeting of the Israeli cabinet on 15 September, Ehud Olmert, the prime minister who soon afterwards stepped down, made an earth- shattering announcement. The long-held Zionist dream of a Greater Israel, a country running from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, was no longer feasible, Olmert admitted.

In the Arab world, two interpretations have long persisted of the Arab-Israeli conflict. One is that the Zionist scheme is making inroads inside and outside Palestine, with the full backing of Washington, the endorsement of Europe, and the compliance of Arab governments. This interpretation accounts, at least partly, for the gushing forth of resentment in the region over the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza. But one mustn’t forget that many Europeans, and even some Israelis, expressed sympathy for the suffering of Gaza, an area that is on the verge of becoming a collective grave by the admission of UN reports.

The other interpretation is that despite Israel’s tight grip on the land of Palestine, the Zionist dream is running into major hurdles both on the international and regional levels. Israel’s war on Lebanon in 2006, in particular, has left it a host of internal and external problems. Even in the US there are signs that US policy in the Middle East, and especially its relations with Israel, are going to be subject to closer scrutiny than in the past.

Furthermore, Israel has fallen into a leadership crisis since the disappearance from the scene of Sharon, the last of Israel’s historic leaders. As a result, Israeli policy has become rather erratic, with reckless leaders, such as Tzipi Livni, taking over. The woman who may replace Olmert as prime minister, and that rose to power in the ranks of the intelligence services, has a track record of alienating Egypt and has even offended President Hosni Mubarak on occasion.

As the world braced itself for a possible Israeli attack on Iran and wondered about Israel’s involvement in the Russian-Georgian crisis, Olmert changed the subject. Those Israeli leaders who had hoped for a Greater Israel were mistaken, he said. And unless Israel moves ahead with a two- state solution, Israel may end up becoming a bi- national state.

“For 40 years, I believed that the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean was all ours since in every place there that is excavated there is evidence of Jewish history. But finally, after a lot of suffering and misgivings, I came to the conclusion that we need to share the land with whom we are residing, if we don’t want to become a bi-national state,” Olmert said.

A two-state solution would bring the majority of the Palestinians “on our side” against the “extremist minority”, he added. Does this mean that Olmert is finally admitting that brute force alone cannot give Israel what it desires? And how many Israeli leaders share this view? His words echo, in a roundabout way, the opinion Ben- Gurion expressed long ago in his memoirs: namely, that the Arabs are not going to bow down to the Zionist scheme.

Over the years, Israel has driven a wedge between Arab governments and resistance groups over the best way of dealing with Zionism. Its success is remarkable in today’s Iraq, where Israel has helped the US from the start and then cultivated friendships in the Kurdish area. True, an Iraqi parliamentarian who visited Israel of late had his immunity revoked. But some people do not rule out Iraqi government recognition of Israel in the near future.
Olmert’s views may not be popular among the Israeli political elite, but by most accounts the Zionist project is grounding to a halt. Olmert’s call for quick action on negotiations with the Palestinians contrasts sharply with the way Israeli politicians used to approach the question of peace.

How should the Palestinians react to such a statement? Perhaps they shouldn’t rush into anything too fast. Absent a fair deal, they must hold their ground. Otherwise, they would risk turning Israel’s moment of weakness into one of victory. Things will start moving forward only once more Israeli politicians embrace Olmert’s view. The bottom line is that Israel must stop giving the Palestinians hard time and start enlisting Arab help in creating a Palestinian state. To this day, Israel wields too much power over Arab governments for things to go back to normal.

Olmert’s parting words may turn out prophetic. Born out of a sense of superiority, Israel’s Zionist dreams are being shattered one after another. But is Israel ready to move on? When it is, it will be the beginning of a new era.


The Zionist Plan for the Middle East
Translated and edited by Israel Shahak
contributed by UP

In his Complete Diaries , Vol. II. p. 711, Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish State stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates.”
Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on 9 Jul y 1947: “The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt up to the Euphrates, it includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

Published by the
Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc.

Holocaust denier gets MP backing

British courts should refuse to act on an EU arrest warrant requesting the extradition of an alleged Holocaust denier, a senior Lib Dem has said.

Australian citizen Dr Gerald Toben was remanded in custody after his arrest by British Police at Heathrow Airport.

German authorities allege Dr Toben published material online “of an anti-semitic and/or revisionist nature”.

But home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said holocaust denial is not a crime in the UK and he should not be extradited.

Dr Toben, a German-born former schoolteacher, was en route from the United States to Dubai when he was arrested.

He has been remanded in custody ahead of a bail hearing on 10 October and a full hearing on 17 October.

He has previously been convicted in Germany for breaking a law that prohibits denying or “playing down” the mass murder of the Jews under Hitler.

We don’t in this country tend to prosecute people for issues that we regard as issues of freedom of speech

But some human rights campaigners have backed his case, saying that his views – however unpleasant – do not make him a criminal in the UK.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), acting for the German authorities, argues that agreements signed in 2003 between the UK and other European countries mean that Britain is duty-bound to assist the German authorities.

But Mr Huhne, a former MEP, told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme that countries could “pick and choose” cases in which they would apply warrants issued by fellow EU member states.

The Lib Dem home affairs spokesman said there were good legal grounds for refusing to participate. He cited the case of Belgium, which is refusing to send suspects to Poland on murder charges which related to abortion.

Mr Huhne said: “There is a clear precedent for doing this and I think we should in this case.”

Dr Toben has in the past described the Holocaust as “a lie” and has claimed on his Australian-based website, the Adelaide Institute, there was “no proof” Hitler systematically exterminated the Jews.

‘Pretty dodgy’

While stressing that he was completely opposed to anti-semitism, Mr Huhne said: “We don’t in this country tend to prosecute people for issues that we regard as issues of freedom of speech.”

Mr Huhne said the case seemed “pretty dodgy” given the fact the offence was not committed in Germany.

In his court appearance earlier this week, Dr Toben, 64, claimed he was the victim of a “legal ambush” and promised never to return to Britain if he was allowed to leave.

Judges will decide whether the alleged conduct constitutes an extraditable offence.

Story from BBC NEWS:

Poisoning Goy minds

A dangerous obsession

By Ali Gharib and Eli Clifton


The 60-minute movie,Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West , was an initiative of the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET), but produced by the Clarion Fund, an organization described as a “front” for Israeli group Aish Hatorah.

Some 28 million copies of Obsession are currently being inserted in newspapers and delivered by mail in key electoral swing states – such as Michigan, Ohio and Florida which, according to recent polling, could go either way.

Critics allege the movie Obsession is “hate propaganda” which paints Muslims as violent extremists and, among other things, explicitly compares the threat posed by radical Islam to that of Nazi Germany in the 1930s – at least two major metropolitan newspapers refused to run the movie because of its perceived bias.

“Despite the perilous state of American newspapers, the St Louis Post-Dispatch advertising department took an ethical stand and refused to distribute the DVD of a film that for two years has troubled American Muslims,” Tim Townsend, a reporter at Missouri’s most influential newspaper wrote this month.

The Clarion Fund is based at the same New York address as Aish Hatorah, a self-described “apolitical” group dedicated to educating Jews about their heritage. Its street address, as listed on the group’s website and a DVD mailer for the film, is a “virtual address” that goes to a post office box in New York City.

While initial press reports about the mass distribution focused on the Clarion Fund’s financing role, it was EMET that organized and oversaw the distribution, EMET’s spokesman and a former press officer for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, Ari Morgenstern, told Inter Press Service.

EMET, according to a recent press release, is “a non-partisan, non-profit organization dedicated to policy research and analysis on democracy and the Middle East.” According to filings made in compliance with the organization’s tax-exempt status, “The organization hosts seminars, debates and educational films featuring Middle East experts in order to educate policymakers and the public at large on the common threats facing Israel and the United States.”

Morgenstern said EMET was “partnered with the Clarion Fund” on what he called the “Obsession Project” which he identified as “an initiative of EMET”. He declined to name the project’s donors – a spokesman for the Clarion Fund, Gregory Ross, also refused to name the fund’s donors, whose identities remain a mystery.

Morgenstern also declined to reveal the cost of the DVD distribution, but did say, “It cost a great deal – it’s a multi-million-dollar effort.” Outside experts have estimated the cost of the operation at between US$15 million and $50 million.

Like hardline neo-conservatives, EMET opposes any land concessions to Palestinians and takes other hardline positions identified with Israel’s right-wing Likud Party and the ”Settler Lobby” there. EMET’s website says, “We regard ourselves as ‘intellectual revolutionaries’.”

Two weeks ago, EMET sponsored a seminar series on Capitol Hill for the controversial multi-billionaire casino and hotel magnate Sheldon Adelson, who is a major donor to right-wing Zionist organizations in the US, such as the far-right lobby group, Freedom’s Watch and the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC).

RJC efforts to persuade Jewish voters that Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is aligned with radical anti-Israel forces in the Islamic world have drawn strong criticism from the mainstream Jewish press.

EMET’s board of advisers includes a list of familiar neo-conservative figures, as well as three former Israeli diplomats, including a former deputy chief of mission in Israel’s Washington embassy.

The group is headed by Sarah Stern, who began her activism on Israeli issues in opposition to the 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and Palestinians. She made a career out of her activism in the far-right Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) as its national policy coordinator from 1998 through 2004.

Notable members of the advisory board include prominent hardline neo-conservatives, including former US UN ambassador the late Jeane Kirkpatrick; Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum; and the Hudson Institute’s Meyrav Wurmser – the Israeli-born spouse of Vice President Dick Cheney’s former top Middle East adviser, David Wurmser.

Other prominent neo-conservative members of the board include Center for Security Policy (CSP) president Frank Gaffney; former Central Intelligence Agency chief James Woolsey; and Heritage Foundation fellows Ariel Cohen and Nina Shea, who has served for years on the quasi-governmental US Commission for International Religious Freedom.

The US-born and educated hardline deputy managing editor of the Jerusalem Post and senior fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at Gaffney’s CSP, Caroline Glick, is also an adviser. Glick, Pipes and Walid Shoebat, a “reformed” terrorist and EMET adviser, are all featured as experts in Obsession.

Also among the top names of listed advisers to EMET are three Israeli diplomats. Two of them, ambassadors Yossi Ben Aharon and Yoram Ettinger, were among the three Israeli ambassadors whom then-Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin referred to as “The Three Musketeers” when they lobbied Washington in opposition to the Oslo accords.

Stern began her career at the behest of three unnamed Israeli diplomats who were based in Washington under Rabin’s predecessor, Yitzhak Shamir, according to EMET’s website, while Ettinger was at one time the chairman of special projects and is still listed as a contributing expert at the Ariel Center for Policy Research, a hardline Likudist Israeli think-tank that opposes the peace process.

Ben Aharon was the director general – effectively the chief of staff – of Shamir’s office.

The third Israeli ambassador, Lenny Ben-David, was appointed by Likud prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to serve as the deputy chief of mission – second in command – at the Israeli Embassy in Washington from 1997 until 2000. Ben-David had also held senior positions at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee for 25 years and is now a consultant and lobbyist.

But EMET is not the only group involved in the controversy to have direct ties to Israel.

The Clarion Fund has also been criticized for initially denying its ties to the Israel’s Aish Hatorah, which were first disclosed publicly by an IPS investigation last year., an organization set up by Aish Hatorah and also a client of Ben-David, admitted to IPS that it had aided the production of the film.

The Clarion Fund and Aish Hatorah are headed by twin Israeli-Canadian brothers Raphael and Ephraim Shore, respectively. The two groups appear to be connected as Clarion is incorporated in Delaware to the New York offices of Aish Hatorah.

“It seems that the Clarion Fund, from what we can tell, is just a virtual organization that is a front for Aish Hatorah,” said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). “They don’t have staff, they don’t have a physical address. Nothing.”

Little is known about the shadowy Clarion Fund, which is listed with the New York Secretary of State’s office as a “foreign not-for-profit foundation”. The group has rejected requests for information about its donors.

IPS has uncovered one donor to the Clarion Fund, the Mamiye Foundation, which gave it $25,000 in August 2007, according to tax filings. Four Mamiye members: Charles M, Charles D, Hyman and Abraham, are listed as trustees on the forms.

According to filings with the New York Secretary of State, a contact listed for a Mamiye company is also the same man listed as a contact and counsel for the Clarion Fund – Eli D Greenberg of the law firm Wolf, Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman and Herz.

Foreign nationals and companies, and domestic tax-exempt non-profit organizations, are prohibited by federal election law from attempting to sway US elections at any level through either contributions to campaigns or advocacy.

Morgenstern, EMET’s spokesman, said that the DVD distribution only went to “swing states” because media attention was focused there, and EMET was hoping to spark a public debate about the threats posed by” radical Islam”.

But the Washington-based CAIR has filed a complaint asking the Federal Election Commission to review the actions of the Clarion Fund both as a foreign entity and as a non-profit outfit.

%d bloggers like this: