LAMB: A rare victory for Lebanon’s Palestinians

Link
October 28, 2009

Why Hezbollah ushered its key Lebanese ally to the woodshed

Nahr el Bared Girl
by Franklin Lamb – News-Fix List – 26 October 2009
Syria’s Yarmouk Refugee Camp, Damascus – Known simply as “the General” Michel Naim Aoun was born in a peaceful mixed Christian-Shia area of Haret Hreik, now a core Hezbollah area. He rose from poverty to become the head of Lebanon’s newly created Eighth army following the September 1983 battle of Souq el Gharb against Palestinian and Druze forces. Six years later he served a forcibly truncated term as President of Lebanon. Since returning from a self imposed 15 year exile in France in 2005, he is widely believed to intend to gain that office. A current outspoken member of Lebanon’s parliament, Aoun has many supporters and detractors being variously referred to a brilliant, cunning, honest, corrupt, obstructionist, mercurial, mentally ill, Napoleonic, and Hezbollah’s most important political ally.

The past couple of months have seen the General’s popular support shrink a bit and one of his recent antics led Hezbollah to signal its concern since the leaders of the Resistance were receiving political heat they did not need nor felt they deserved.
This current problem began on August 13, 2009 when the key Hezbollah ally and ambitious leader of the Free Patriotic Movement sought and was immediately granted from Lebanon’s highest administrative Court, the Shura Council, an injunction freezing any and all reconstruction of Nahr al Bared (Arabic: Cold River) Palestinian Refugees camp which had been destroyed two years ago in a three month battle between the salafist group Fatah al Islam and the Lebanese army. The renewable injunction was initially for 60 days and it instantly froze UNRWA’s $445-million rebuilding project for the complete rebuilding of Nahr al Bared by the projected April 2012 completion date. Aoun’s injunction added to the skepticism over the reconstruction among some Nahr al-Bared displaced residents, who have long voiced fears that the state would never allow them to rebuild their camp, and feared the fate of the disappeared Tell Zaatar camp leveled during the 1975-90 Civil War.

Specifically General Aoun had petitioned the State Shura to halt backfilling in the camp, a method of rebuilding on top of archeological ruins which secures and preserves them for future exploration.
Are there limits to bashing Lebanon’s refugees?
Aoun argued that he was just trying to protect Lebanon’s heritage. Hezbollah did not immediately respond to queries of ‘what gives?’ from the Sabra Shatila Foundation and others who assumed that Aoun would not have acted without their ok. Few in Lebanon, and no one in the Lebanon’s 12 Palestinian camps and 10 gatherings, credited his sudden pro-environmental epiphany as they reminded each other that when the General was head of the Lebanese army and during battles in 1989-90 he savagely destroyed plenty of Lebanon’s heritage including ancient ruins, places of worship and museums if they were located in areas controlled by his adversaries.

Some analysts have pointed out that Aoun surely knows, that Lebanon, to paraphrase Robert Fisk, is a giant historical club sandwich, the lower slice of stone “bread” being Canaanite –about 5,000 years old along with Greek, Roman, Crusader, Omayed , Ottoman and European slices. Wherever one puts in a shovel and digs a few feet, chances are ‘antiquities’ will be close to the blade.
Many suspected that Aoun in expressing concern for ancient ruins had more than archaeology in mind since his petition, if sustained by the State Shura Council would mean that UNRWA would have to rebuild much of the camp on a different site, meaning many of Nahr al-Bared’s more than 31,000 registered residents would never return to their homes. Government representatives have stated that it would be impossible to rebuild in the area adjacent to the camp, as Aoun proposed, because there is no land available in the area within miles of Nahr al Bared.

According to Ammar Saadedine, an urban planner with the Nahr al Bared Reconstruction Commission, Aoun is trying to use the Palestinian issue to send political messages to friends and foes. “We don’t want to get involved in internal Lebanese issues. We are just demanding our rights.”
Many Christians and other Lebanese still fear that the reconstruction or granting basic human rights, would promote the assimilation of Palestinians, skewing the Muslim-Christian balance by encouraging naturalization. These sentiments appeared to be echoed initially by Hezbollah’s spokesman on the Palestinian question, Hassan Hodroj, who explained: “The threat of tawtin (naturalization) is genuine. It is one of the ways in which Israel, backed by the US, is endangering the region.”

What Lebanon can learn from Syria about human rights for Palestinian refugees.

According to progressive Lebanese MP Ghassan Moukheiber, “our official policy is to maintain Palestinians in a vulnerable, precarious situation to diminish prospects for their naturalization or permanent settlement”.
What some supporters of Lebanon’s Palestinians are pushing for from the next government is a simple law patterned after the 1956 Syrian one that grants Palestinian Refugees “the right to employment, commerce, and national service, while preserving their original nationality.”

Such an enactment in Lebanon would create immediate civil rights for refugees but not give them citizenship. In fact few of Lebanon’s Palestinians would accept naturalization.
Others accused Aoun of shameless pandering to embittered Akkar residents who lost sons fighting Fatah al Islam as a majority of the 175 Lebanese army soldiers killed were from their community opposite Nahr al Bared Camp.
Still others accused Aoun of trying to carve out some of Samir Geagea’s more right wing Christian base. Geagea, who is promoted in some circles here as the Obama’s administration’s only remaining reliable operative in Lebanon as a result of three years of clumsy US-Israel interference in internal political disputes is making a move to corral Lebanon’s Christians under his leadership. (Comment: one is reminded of the 25th anniversary at the October 24, 1983 explosion at the US marine barracks which was a direct and foreseeable result of the Reagan administration joining the same Phalange party against the Sunni, Shia and Druze population.)

Broad based opposition to Aoun’s injunction
More than 2000 people rallied in downtown Beirut on 10/20/09 in a show of solidarity with the displaced residents of Nahr el Bared. More than 40 different community organizations, including the Washington DC-Beirut based Sabra Shatila Foundation, joined the protest organized by the Nahr el Bared Advocacy Committee. Lovely Palestinian children from camps across Lebanon arrived for the protest and some had built small cardboard houses to illustrate their worries over becoming displaced and homeless. A majority of the destroyed camps 31,000 refugees are packed into ‘temporary’ housing including garages or metal storage sheds where in summer the inside temperatures can soar beyond 140 degrees F. and in winter plunge below freezing. Some are indefinitely warehoused along the tall grass perimeters of the camp. The same grasses from which Fatah al Islam fighters crawled to carry out their initial slaughter of Lebanese soldiers in May of 2007.

Beirut’s Daily Star quoted one of the Nahr al Bared demonstrators: “It’s very hot in summer and very cold in winter,” said one of the children’s fathers, Ziad. “We want to see the reconstruction started before looking for any food or water or anything else. We don’t have a house. I want a house to live in, so the first thing we need is the reconstruction.”
Simultaneous demonstrations protesting Aoun’s injunction took place inside Nahr al Bared and at Beirut’s Shatila and Burj al Barajneh camps as well as in the Ain al-Helweh, Al-Buss and Burj Shemali refugee camps down south. In Saida’s Ain al-Helweh, some Islamist groups discussed ominous and threatening contingency plans if the rebuilding ban was not lifted. Decades of exclusion and marginalization has incubated among some young Palestinians millenarian ideas associated with al-Qa’ida. Some of the young men have been organizing attack units. They pose as the protectors and guardians of international Sunni Islam. As is well known in Lebanon one of the 9/11 hijackers dedicated a poem to Ain al-Helweh jihadists in his videotaped will and dozens of Palestinian fighters from the camp have joined al-Qa’ida in Iraq.

One Hezbollah source told this observer after several attempts to explain the party’s position in Aoun project:
“No way does Hezbollah control the General, only his wife can do that!” he said with a grin. “We in Hezbollah consult regularly with his staff but frankly we benefit more from our alliance than he does and there are limits to what we can press him to do. I personally think Aoun made
a mistake with his Nahr al Bared case and it appeared he was bashing the Palestinian refugees for immediate personal political gains. Honestly, all parties in Lebanon have been guilty of doing that including us I am sorry to say, but I would insist we have done it less than others. But that’s my view and it may or may not be that of our leadership.

There are many strongly held opinions within Hezbollah. Contrary to Zionist propaganda and what some in the West believe, we are very democratic within the party and we are always analyzing and debating events and ideas. If a party member comes up with a sound idea it has a good chance of being implemented. In that sense we are different from the Lebanon Ziam (tribal leader) system still dominant in so many of the 18 Confessions here. But I believe the party has insisted that General Aoun drop his case”.
Following talks encouraged by Hezbollah between Michel Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) and Palestinian factions just before the 10/20/09 demonstrations, an FPM representative was sent by Aoun to the protest to show solidarity with resuming work at Nahr al Bared. Aoun’s representative stressed that the FPM still remains opposed to the naturalization of Lebanon’s Palestinian refugees. So do an estimated 95% of the refugees who want to live in Palestine not Lebanon but they need some civil rights until their departure.

For some of the surprised demonstrators seeing Aoun’s representative was a good sign. Another positive sign for the Palestinians came when Aoun could have submitted reminders asking the Shura Council to extend the rebuilding ban past the original two-month suspension. Although expected by many to do so, he did not and let the deadline lapse.
A request from Hezbollah’s Shura Council to Lebanon’s Shura Council?

This was confirmed to this observer on October 11, twelve’s days before the Shura’s injunction was widely expected to be renewed. During a Conference in Damascus on the Golan Heights, which subject is also of concern to Hezbollah, a good friend and member of Hezbollah’s delegation and one of the brains behind Hezbollah’s spate of successful German-aided prisoner exchanges, came to my room. Knowing of my often expressed concern, he embraced and said, “It’s over, Aoun will abandon his actions against Nahr al Bared.” Without pressing my friend for details, I concluded that Hezbollah did not approve of preventing the camps rebuilding and instructed Aoun to back off because the Resistance did not need the heat.

Sure enough, on October 23, caretaker Prime Minister Fuad Siniora gave the good news to Palestinian representatives that he had instructed UNRWA to immediately restart the reconstruction of Nahr al Bared, despite the possibility that theoretically the Shura Council might still decide for a permanent halt to the rebuilding. Hezbollah sources advised this observer that there will not me any similar delays by Aoun or others regarding Nahr al Bared.
A collective sigh of relief could be heard by this observer all the way deep inside the Yamouk Palestinian Refugee Camp in Damascus from Lebanon’s Palestinian refugee community. For their friends know well the paucity of breaks they receive these days.

Franklin Lamb is Director of the Sabra Shatila Foundation. He is reachable at fplamb@sabrashatila.org.

Advertisements

After all I am a Proper Zionist Jew by Gilad Atzmon

i didn’t want to put this one before u read it… i thought you may not approve,, it is a satire …‏

From: Gilad Atzmon (giladatzmon@mac.com)

Link

Tuesday, October 27, 2009 at 07:40AM Gilad Atzmon

I am a Holocaust survivor

Yes, I am a survivor, for I have managed to survive all the scary accounts of the Holocaust: the one about the soap (1), the one about the lamp shades, the one about the camps, the mass shooting, the one about the gas (2) and the one about the death march (3). I just managed to survive them all.

In spite of all these fear inflicting stories, that were purposely installed in my soul since I opened my eyes for the first time, I have become a functional and even a successful human being. I somehow survived the horror against all odds. I even manage to love my neighbour. In spite of all these fearful, traumatic indoctrination I miraculously managed to master my cheering alto saxophone rather than the sobbing violin.

In fact, I have already decided that in case the Queen, or any other member of the Royal Family should ever consider to make me into a ‘Sir’ for my bebop achievements, or even for facing Zionist barbarism with my bare pen, I will immediately change my surname from Atzmon to Vive, just to become the first and only Sir Vive.

I am also totally against Holocaust denial

I clearly resent those who deny the genocides that are taking place in the name of the Holocaust. Palestine is one example, Iraq is another and the one that is set for Iran, is probably too scary to contemplate.

The Holocaust is a relatively new religion (4). It lacks mercy or compassion, instead it promises revenge through retribution. For its followers, it is somehow liberating because it allows them to punish whoever they like as long they gain some pleasure. This may explain why the Israelis ended up punishing the Palestinians for crimes that were committed by Europeans. It is rather clear that the newly emerging religion is not just about ‘eye for an eye’; it is actually an eye for thousands and thousands of eyes.

A month ago, while visiting in Auschwitz, Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak left a note in the official visitors book: ‘a strong Israel is both the comfort and the revenge’(5). No one could summarise the aspiration of the religion any better. The Holocaust religion doesn’t offer redemption. It is a crude violent manifestation of sheer collective brutality. It cannot resolve anything, for aggression can only lead to more and more aggression. In the Holocaust religion there is neither room for peace or grace. Take it from Barak, revenge is where they find comfort.

To deny the danger posed by the Holocaust religion and its followers is to be complicit in a growing crime against humanity and against every possible human value.

I am also in total support of the Jewish National Project

Some believe that after 2000 years of ‘phantasmic Diaspora’ Jews are indeed entitled to an imaginary ‘national home land of their own’. The Zionists apparently meant it sincerely. The Jewish state is now realistic enough to have turned the entire Middle East into a ticking bomb.

Reviewing the Israeli record of crimes against humanity in the last six decades doesn’t leave much room for speculation. We are dealing here with a pathological sinister society. Hence, as much as some of us may agree that Jews should enjoy a hypothetical right for a land of their own, planet Earth is certainly not the ideal location for such an affair.

Hence, I would urge NASA to join in and to make a special effort to find a suitable alternative planet for the Zionist homeland in outer space or even in another galaxy. The Galactic Zionist project would signify the immediate move from ‘promised land’ to ‘promised planet’. I would enthusiastically stress that rather than searching for ‘a land with no people for a people with no land’, what we really want is a ‘lonely planet’. It can even be a desert for they claim to know how to make the desert bloom. In a planet of their own the galactic Zionists wouldn’t need to oppress anyone, they wouldn’t ethnically cleanse either, they wouldn’t have to lock the indigenous people in concentration camps, for there won’t be any indigenous people around to abuse, starve, murder and cleanse. They wouldn’t have to pour white phosphorous over their neighbours for there won’t be any neighbours. I would highly recommend NASA to search for a planet with very low gravity just to make it light for people to wander around. After all, we want the new galactic Zionists to enjoy their futuristic project as much as the Palestinians and many others may enjoy their absence.

So here I am, a proper Jew after all: I am a survivor, I oppose Holocaust denial, I support the Jewish national aspiration. Even the chief Rabbi of Britain cannot ask for more than that.

(1) Acknowledged recently to be a ‘myth’ by the Israeli holocaust museum Yad Vashem

(2) A historical fact protected by European Law.

(3) A slightly confusing narrative. If the Nazis were interested in annihilating the entire European Jewish population as suggested by the orthodox Zionist holocaust narrative, then it is rather ambiguous as to just what led them to march what was left of European Jewry, into their crumbling Nazi fatherland at a time when it was clear that they were losing the war. The two narratives i.e. ‘annihilation’ and ‘death march’, seem to oppose each other. The issue deserves further elaboration. I would just suggest that the reasonable answers I have come across may severely damage the Zionist holocaust narrative.

(4) The Israeli Philosophy professor Yeshayahu Leibowitz was probably the first to define the holocaust as the ‘new Jewish religion’.

(5) http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3790707,00.html

Double standards

LINK

Notice that no report on Goldstone fails to cite Israeli responses. Notice that no US media EVER cite what Hamas says about its own response to Goldstone, like this from Mish`al, even if they are propaganda words–not different from US talk of “collateral damage”: “”Hamas does not aim to kill civilians. Hamas does not want to target the civilians,” he said. “Hamas defends itself, but because it has simple abilities and its rockets are inaccurate in targeting, so it reaches the civilians, but we do not intend to do that.”” (thanks Olivia)

Posted by As’ad at 9:14 AM

WATCH: Hamas chief says group doesn’t aim to kill civilians, but ‘rockets are inaccurate in targeting.’

The Dark Side of the “Special Relationship”

Darkside US-Israel FlagsLink

By Justin Raimondo,

Spy vs. spy, Israel vs. America
A silent battle has been raging right under our noses, a fierce underground struggle pitting the U.S. against one of its closest allies. For all its newsworthiness, the media has barely noticed the story — except when it surfaces, briefly, like a giant fin jutting above the waves. The aggressor in this war is the state of Israel, with the U.S., its sponsor and protector, playing defense. This is the dark side of the “special relationship” — a battle of spy vs. spy.

Convicted spy Jonathan Pollard — now serving a life sentence — stole secrets so vital that an attempt by the Israelis to get him pardoned was blocked by a massive protest from the intelligence and defense communities. Bill Clinton wanted to trade Pollard for Israeli concessions in the ongoing “peace process,” and he was only prevented from doing so by a threat of mass resignations by the top leadership of the intelligence community.

The reason for their intransigence: among the material Pollard had been asked by his Israeli handlers to steal was the U.S. attack plan against the Soviet Union. According to Seymour Hersh, then-CIA director Bill Casey claimed Tel Aviv handed over the information to Moscow in exchange for relaxation of travel restrictions on Soviet Jews, who were then allowed to emigrate to Israel.

The Pollard case is emblematic — but it was just the beginning of a years-long effort by U.S. counterintelligence to rid themselves of the Israeli incubus. Law enforcement was — and presumably still is — convinced Pollard was very far from alone, and that a highly placed “mole” had provided him with key information. In his quest to procure very specific information, Pollard knew precisely which documents to look for — knowledge he couldn’t access without help from someone very high in government circles.
In addition, the National Security Agency (NSA) intercepted a phone conversation between an Israeli intelligence officer and his boss in Tel Aviv, during which they discussed how to get hold of a letter by then-secretary of state Warren Christopher to Yasser Arafat. The Washington spy suggested they use “Mega,” but his boss demurred: “This is not something we use Mega for,” he averred.

The search for Mega and his underlings continues to this day, as U.S. counterintelligence attempts to rip up what appears to be a vast Israeli spy operation by its very deep roots. That’s why they went after Ben Ami Kadish, who handed over U.S. secrets to Tel Aviv and shared a handler with Pollard, and why they indicted Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, two top officials of AIPAC, the powerful pro-Israel lobbying group. That’s why they were listening on the other end as Jane Harman promised an Israeli agent to intervene in the Rosen-Weissman case. And now a new front has been opened up in this subterranean war with the arrest of Stewart David Nozette, a top U.S. scientist who worked for the Pentagon, had access to the most closely guarded nuclear secrets, and was the lead scientist in the search for water on the moon.

Nozette’s case is interesting because of his impressive resume: he held top positions with the Department of Energy, the Department of Defense, and NASA, and he served on the White House National Space Council under George H.W. Bush. From 1989 until March 2006, he held “Q” clearance, which means he had access to “critical nuclear weapon design information” and vital information concerning 20 “special access programs” — secrets only a very few top government officials had knowledge of.

In other words, this wasn’t just some mid-level schmuck who wanted to sell out his country for cash: he was one of the big boys — the principal author of the Clementine biostatic radar experiment, which allowed U.S. scientists to discover water on the moon — a kind of J. Robert Oppenheimer figure, whose singular contributions to the U.S. space program and its military applications granted him security clearances available to a very select few.

The affidavit in support of the criminal complaint [.pdf] alleging espionage is terse, vague in parts, and brimming with implication. Taking their cues from the Department of Justice press release, most news reports state, “The complaint does not allege that the government of Israel or anyone acting on its behalf committed any offense under U.S. laws,” leaving out the last three words in the DOJ’s sentence: “in this case.”

In this particular case, it’s true, prosecutors are going after Nozette for violations that occurred while they were reeling him in, with a federal agent pretending to be a Mossad officer offering him money (not very much, by the way) in exchange for secrets. The real question, however, is what caused them to zero in on Nozette? A Washington Times piece cites Kenneth Piernick, a former senior FBI agent, who opined:
He must have made some kind of attempt, which triggered the FBI’s interest in him. They cut in between him and whoever he was trying to work with and posed as an intelligence officer, agent, or courier to handle the issue, and then when he delivered what he intended to deliver to that person, his contact was likely an undercover FBI agent or [someone from] another U.S. intelligence service

Yet Nozette may have made more than a mere “attempt.” The affidavit alleges that, from 1998 to 2008, he served as a consultant to “an aerospace company wholly owned by the government of Israel,” during which time “approximately once a month representatives of the aerospace company proposed questions, or taskings, to Nozette.” He answered these questions, and, in return, received regular payments totaling $250,000.

This indicates the Feds had been on to Nozette for quite some time, and with good cause. The affidavit also notes that, at the beginning of this year, he traveled to “a different foreign country” in possession of two computer “thumb” drives, which seemed to have mysteriously disappeared upon his return some three weeks later. What was on the drives — and who were the recipients?

In 2007, federal authorities raided the offices of Nozette’s nonprofit company, the Alliance for Competitive Technology (ACT), purportedly because ACT, having procured several lucrative government contracts, had defrauded the federal government by overcharging. The affidavit cites an anonymous colleague of Nozette who recalled the scientist said that if the U.S. government ever tried to put him in jail he would go to Israel or another foreign country and “tell them everything” he knows.

Perhaps the real reason for the raid, however, had to do with the FBI’s growing suspicion — if not certainty — he was funneling U.S. secrets to Tel Aviv. ACT is a curious creation, a “nonprofit” group that nevertheless generated over half a million dollars last year according to documents filed with the IRS, with over $150,000 in salary and benefits paid out to Nozette. But it wasn’t just about money. ACT’s mission statement reads like a spy’s dream come true:
“The Alliance for Competitive Technology has been created to serve the national and public interest by conducting scientific research and educational activities aimed at expanding the utilization of National and Government Laboratory resources. The National Laboratories possess significant technology, technologists, and resources, of great potential value to growing U.S. industrial organizations, both small and large. Recent changes in national policy (the Stevenson-Wydler Act of 1986 and the NASA Technology Utilization Program) have sanctioned the pursuit of technology transfer from these organizations. However, the capabilities and resources present in National Laboratories are often difficult to access by small and medium sized organizations with limited resources. ACT will research the best mechanisms to facilitate this transfer through focused research on technology transfer mechanisms, and educational and instructive programs on technology transfer from National Laboratories. In addition, ACT will enable U.S. organizations to utilize the resources of National Laboratories through existing established mechanisms (e.g., the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Technology Affiliates Program).Transfer of commercially valuable technology is significantly enhanced by such direct support of private sector efforts.”

In short: ACT is all about technology transfer — from the U.S. to Israel. This, as is well-known, is one of the favored activities of the Israeli intelligence services, which regularly pilfer the latest American technology (especially military applications) to such an extent that a General Accounting Office investigation once characterized the effort as “the most aggressive espionage operations against the U.S. of any U.S. ally.”
ACT had contracts with the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C., the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in Arlington, Va., and NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. It is hardly a leap of faith to conclude that vital data flowing from these projects was fed directly into the waiting maw of the Mossad.

Nozette was a key figure in developing and promoting the “Star Wars” ballistic missile defense system. His colleague in the “High Frontier” movement — and the official director of ACT — is one Klaus Heiss, like Nozette an enthusiast [.pdf] of space colonization (who also has some strong views on other subjects).
Contacted by an FBI agent masquerading as an Israeli intelligence agent, Nozette didn’t blink when told his lunch companion was from the Mossad: “Good,” he said. “Happy to be of assistance.” This was well before the issue of money was raised. Later in the conversation, Nozette boasted of his top-level security clearances and the range and depth of his knowledge of U.S. secrets, adding, “I don’t get recruited by the Mossad every day. By the way, I knew this day would come.” Questioned further by the undercover agent, Nozette said, “I thought I was working for you already. I mean, that’s what I always thought [the foreign company] was — just a front.”

Which it no doubt was.

Nozette agreed to be a regular “asset,” yet he clearly felt his position was increasingly precarious. He inquired about the right of return and raised the possibility that he might go to Israel. He wanted a passport as part of his payment, in addition to the few thousand dollars the FBI was putting in a post office “dead drop” for him on receipt of stolen secrets.

Well, then, so what? Don’t all nations, even allies, spy on each other? What’s the significance of this particular case?

On the surface, our relationship with Israel is encompassed by the terms of the “special relationship,” which has so far consisted of the U.S. giving unconditional support to Tel Aviv’s every action, no matter how brutal [.pdf] or contrary to our interests — and tolerating, to a large degree, its extensive covert operations on U.S. soil (or, at least, keeping quiet about them). On a deeper level, however, the tensions in this one-way love affair have frayed the specialness of the relationship almost to the breaking point.

This is not just due to the election of Barack Obama, who is widely perceived in Israel as being biased against the Jewish state. These tensions arose during Bush’s second term, when U.S. policy began to perceptibly tilt away from Tel Aviv. A particularly telling blow to U.S.-Israeli relations was the decision by the U.S. to clamp down on visa requirements for Israelis entering the U.S.: potential visitors from Israel are now required to undergo an interview, restrictions on their length of stay have been extended, and admission to the U.S. is no longer assured.

In the secret world of spooks spying on one another, the U.S.-Israeli relationship is increasingly adversarial, while in the diplomatic-political realm, it has nearly reached the point of open hostilities. This is thanks to the objective conditions that determine relations among nations: in the post-Cold War world, Israel necessarily became much less of an asset to the U.S. In the post-9/11 world, as John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt have so trenchantly pointed out, it is an outright liability.

Our self-sacrificial policy of unconditional support for Israel has earned us implacable enemies in the Arab world and granted our adversaries a priceless propaganda prize — and the growing awareness of this disability is something the Israelis no doubt find disturbing. The distortion of our foreign policy by the power of the Israel lobby is also being widely noted, and this is their real Achilles heel.

In this case, too, the Lobby will no doubt rush to exert their influence to downgrade Nozette’s crime and even depict him as an innocent victim of entrapment. Defenders of the AIPAC duo conjured a vast “anti-Semitic” conspiracy within the U.S. Justice Department and the FBI to explain the alleged persecution of Rosen and Weissman, and the same tactics are bound to be trotted out in this instance.

That is nonsense. The FBI didn’t just pick Nozette arbitrarily and conjure his crimes out of thin air. Their target was already deeply involved with the Israelis, and this is what brought him to their attention in the first place.
The nature and extent of Israeli spying in the U.S. is not a subject you’ll see the “mainstream” media very often touch with so much as a 10-foot pole, but when it does the results can be ominously disturbing. I, for one, haven’t forgotten Carl Cameron’s four-part series on Israeli spying in the U.S., broadcast by Fox News in December 2001. According to Cameron, his sources in law enforcement told him the Israelis had been following the 9/11 hijackers and had foreknowledge of their plans but somehow neglected to tell us. And then there were those dancing Israelis, leaping for joy at the sight of the Twin Towers burning!

This is the dark side of the “special relationship,” so dark that hardly anyone wants to acknowledge it, let alone consider its implications.

Source: antiwar.com

Justin Raimondo - jpegJustin Raimondo is an American author and the editorial director of the website Antiwar.com. In addition to his thrice-weekly column for antiwar.com, he is a regular contributor to The American Conservative and Chronicles magazine. Raimondo also writes two columns a month for Taki’s Top Drawer.
Read more by Justin Raimondo
Israeli Exceptionalism October 04, 2009
Why the Attacks on J Street? – October 25th, 2009
Our Two-Faced Iran Policy – October 22nd, 2009

THE JEWISH RELIGION: CH II: ITS INFLUENCE TODAY BY ELIZABETH DILLING: THE TALMUD REVILED

Link

Holman Hunt: The Finding of the Saviour in the Temple

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today by Elizabeth Dilling. Ch. II: THE TALMUD REVILED

[Editor’s Note: Elizabeth Dilling, all things considered, was a prophetess in her own time. Her various works, which include her exposure of the Zionist Jewish infiltration of the United States of America and her analysis of Bolshevism, Communism and Zionism as one Beast with numerous names, are a testament to her courage and her foresight in revealing the truth during a period of American history when to speak out was to risk the inevitable attacks by the Jewish establishment.

Groups like the American Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith International and their attack-dog the Anti-Defamation League, were always ready and willing to vilify anyone who dared to speak out about their plans to implement their one world government and Elizabeth Dilling was forced to deal with their Talmudic tactics from the moment she picked up the sword of truth.

Each chapter of her book is preceded by the Forward and an Introduction. Readers who go beyond Chapter One will find it convenient to just scroll down the page until the start of the new chapter.]

Foreword

Elizabeth Dilling Stokes was born, raised, and educated in Chicago. After attending the University of Chicago she married, and for many years devoted her life to her children, social activities on the North Shore of Chicago, and being a concert harpist. After hearing of the great “humanitarian experiment” in Soviet Russia, she traveled there in 1931, and was able to go behind the scenes. She was shocked at the forced labor, the squalid living quarters, and deplorable living conditions, and the atmosphere of fear created by the Soviet dictatorship.

She was most shocked by the virulent anti-Christianity of the atheist Communist regime.

Following her return to the United States she lectured and wrote about what she had seen, realizing from the opposition which immediately arose that a substantial Marxist movement was active in the United States. In 1934 her first book The Red Network was published, an expose of the persons and organizations furthering Red causes in the United States.

In 1936, her second book, The Roosevelt Red Record and Its Background, was published. Almost immediately after these books were published, she was attacked as “anti-semitic,” although she had actually offered her anti-Communist services to Jewish organizations, and knew nothing of organized Jewish involvement in the Marxist movement. After researching and studying, however, in 1940 she published her third book The Octopus, which dealt with these subjects.

After World War II commenced, Mrs. Dilling became convinced that, despite President Roosevelt’s protestations that not one American boy would ever again fight on foreign soil, there was a movement afoot to involve the United States, with the result that a substantial part of the world would be communized later.

In 1941, she led a Mother’s March on Washington to oppose the “Lend Lease” bill, proclaimed to help keep us out of war by its sponsors, but proving the last step for our involvement. The bill passed by only one vote. A few months later, the United States went to war.

In 1944, Mrs. Dilling’s views involved her in the now infamous mass “sedition” trial. The case was ultimately dismissed by a Federal Court as “a travesty on justice.”

She was later remarried to Jeremiah Stokes, a Christian anti-Communist writer, and she continued to write and lecture in behalf of Christianity and Constitutional Americanism, first publishing this book in 1964.

Mrs. Dilling Stokes died in 1966 at the age of 72.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/whois.html

from The Plot Against Christianity
by Elizabeth Dilling

Introduction to Elizabeth Dilling
Foreword to the 1964 Edition
Published by
The Elizabeth Dilling Foundation
Box 659, Chicago 90

Who is Elizabeth Dilling?


Elizabeth Dilling

Our family trip to Red Russia in 1931 started my dedication to anti-Communism. We were taken behind the scenes by friends working for the Soviet Government and saw deplorable conditions, first hand.

We were appalled, not only at the forced labor, the squalid crowded living quarters, the breadline rationcard workers’ stores, the mothers pushing wheelbarrows and the begging children of the State nurseries besieging us.

The open virulent anti-Christ campaign, everywhere, was a shock. In public places were the tirades by loud speaker, in Russian (our friends translated). Atheist cartoons representing Christ as a villain, a drunk, the object of a cannibalistic orgy (Holy Communion); as an oppressor of labor; again as trash being dumped from a wheelbarrow by the Soviet “Five-Year-Plan”–these lurid cartoons filled the big bulletin boards in the churches our Soviet guides took us to visit.

In the Museum of the Revolution we were shown a huge world map. As our Guide turned a switch, lights came on indicating the places all over the world where Communist Party headquarters were then functioning. Proudly our Guide announced: “Our world revolution will start with China and end with the UNITED STATES”.

“O, NO! Not THAT”, was my thought. But, country by country, the boast has been steadily advancing. I took pictures of the anti-Christ posters on the porch of St. Isaac’s Cathedral in Leningrad.

Russia Changes My Life

We were taken to the beautiful Church of the Redeemer in Moscow which was then, we were told, about to be dynamited to make way for a “Palace of Soviets”. There was a display of full-sized mannikins dressed in the robes of the Church carrying on the Good Friday Footwashing ceremony. Our Guide rasped: “This was to show that if the Archbishop could wash the feet of the humble priest the poor should endure their sufferings without complaint! Religion was always for the suppression of the people, to keep them working from dawn to late at night under the lash!”

I thought of our Savior washing the feet of His Disciples as an example, and telling them that he who would be great among you should be the servant of all (John 13:13-15; Matt. 23:11). I glanced up at the exquisite stained glass window of Christ, about to be demolished, and a little tear trickled down my cheek as I thought: “I can never hate You like that!” (I did not know then that the Pharisee Talmud gives Him FIVE sadistic deaths today).

Staying at my hotel was the representative of a foreign country. He told me of the police terror; how the last manager of that hotel had been whisked off in the middle of the night by the “Black Mariah”–like millions of others never to be seen again. Some of our party had been taken to the police station; they had laughed in a movie theatre. They were released when they explained that they had laughed at a private joke, not at the picture (which was Soviet-made). After this, and more, I returned to the “NICE” North Shore of Chicago where the “intelligentsia” were rendering brainwashed reverence to the “great Soviet Experiment”.

Lecturing

Behind the backs of the careless Guides I had taken movies of the rickety trains, etc., in Russia. By chance I started showing these movies to patriotic audiences, my husband running the projector as I told the story. Articles written for a little local newspaper were reprinted by the DAR and larger and larger groups called for my talks: District meetings of the Legion; the Military Intelligence; churches from coast to coast. I was recommended for all Chambers of Commerce, and spoke for the Minneapolis, Cleveland, Los Angeles, etc., groups. I broadcast over the Moody Bible Institute radio and its head became my closest friend to her death.

Dr. Ironside introduced me as the only woman he had ever asked to occupy his pulpit in the Moody Church. I spoke in the great church of Dr. W. B. Riley, organizer of the World Fundamentalist Assn., my defender to his death. I frequently spoke in Detroit churches and on numerous occasions was entertained at the executives’ table at the Ford plant. Henry Ford (who never changed his mind about the role of Jewry) had me write (1939) a report on the U. of Michigan (80 pages). He contributed that year $5,000 to the cost of my office labor which cost $12,000 that year. The head of the National Sojourners had me airmail my two books to Sen. Royal Copeland to give to Vice Pres. Garner who, I was told, stayed up all night reading them and had his friend Cong. Dies of Texas start up the Dies Committee on Un-American Activities (later called the House Com.) as a result.

The hub of world Jewish anti-Christ power, the financial and industrial power best described in Rev. 18:11-, is the AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE with its B’nai B’rith brotherhood, and its “secret police”, smear and ruin arm, the Anti-Defamation League.

After having pushed a reluctant USA into World War II–to spread Communism across the earth, and with its first world base, Soviet Russia, as our “ally”, it was decided to crush all ANTI-COMMUNISTS by trying them as “Fascists, Nazis”. A series of indictments against some 30 anti-Communists, of which I was one, was engineered by the American Jewish Committee, in 1942, 1943, 1944. The 1942 indictment never came to trial.

The 1943 indictment was dismissed in Washington by Judge Adkins. Only the 1944 indictment went to trial under a stooge judge Eicher. An unbelievable farce was staged without any legality or fact. After the death of judge Eicher, the case was dismissed by Judge Bolitha Laws with the scathing denunciation that it had been a crime to hold those people on trial all that time without a single piece of evidence in accordance with the charge being introduced by the prosecution against ANY defendant. The Communist press had been gloating that the “sedition trial” was part of the “Moscow Purge trials” then in session all over Europe. I reproduced the item on one of my Bulletins, sent to every Congressman.

Background of E. D.

Travel in more than 60 countries convinced me that the USA had the greatest system of government, and was the most fortunate nation on earth. I did not want it Sovietized, collectivized. Careful research and documentation have resulted in the fact that nothing I have ever printed has, to date, been refuted by friend or foe.

BORN in CHICAGO, daughter of Dr. L. Kirkpatrick, physician and surgeon, of Virginian, Scotch-Irish, Presbyterian ancestry. My mother. Elizabeth Harding, descended from a long line of Anglican bishops thru her father. Her mother, Jane Musquet, was of English-French descent with a Catholic priest uncle in Paris. I married Albert Dilling, of Norwegian Lutheran ancestry.

Mother of two children, married and active in Episcopal Church, of which I am a communicant. Graduate of the Starrett School for Girls, Chicago Normal School; Univ. of Chicago student, before and after marriage; pupil of world’s greatest harpist, Alberto Salvi; was concert harpist and pres. of Chicago Harpists’ Society. The RUSSIAN trip ended a musical career and a “nice” suburbanite existence.

WRITINGS

* The famous RED NETWORK — A Who’s Who and Handbook of Radicalism for Patriots, of which some 100.000 copies have circled the globe, unrefuted factually by friend or foe.
* The ROOSEVELT RED RECORD AND ITS BACKGROUND — a second Red Network. of over 400 pages with two indexes.
* THE OCTOPUS — on the ramifications of Jewish power.
* [ THE PLOT AGAINST CHRISTIANITY, republished as THE JEWISH RELIGION: ITS INFLUENCE TODAY — directly addressing the teachings of Judaism and its influence in the affairs of the modern world ]

The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
by Elizabeth Dilling
Ch. II: THE TALMUD REVILED

Chapter Summary

The Christian of today is bombarded from all sides with reference to our “Judaeo-Christian Heritage,” our “Judaeo-Christian Civilization,” and the “brotherhood” which should prevail, presumably, between Christian and Talmudic Judaism. Such propaganda could only succeed if one is in ignorance as to the nature of the Talmud and the total antagonism between present-day Judaism and Christianity which necessarily must exist.

Over the centuries and right up to the present century, there was not such ignorance of Talmudic precepts. The truth as it was repeatedly revealed, caused it and its adherents to be reviled, and justly so.

It is indeed strange that the Bulls of the Popes over the many centuries, warning against the Jews, should be seemingly unknown to the Catholic clergy today, and that the writings of Luther, which generally are like almost a second gospel to Protestants of the Lutheran fold, should be equally unknown on this subject today!

The first English translation of the Babylonian Talmud was in 1903 by Rodkinson (real name — M. Levi Frumkin), and was edited by Rabbi Isaac M. Wise, “Father” of so-called “Reform Judaism.” Rodkinson deleted much of the filth which is in the unexpurgated Talmud, and used no identifying folio numbers, as were in the original, but nevertheless, even this abridged translation proved very revealing. The Introduction states: (See Exhibit 9):

The persecutors of the Talmud, during the period ranging from the First Century B.C., have varied in their character, objects and actions. In one respect, however, they all agreed, namely, in their general wish to destroy its existence. Careful consideration of its many vicissitudes certainly justifies the assertion that the Talmud is one of the wonders of the world.

During the twenty centuries of its existence not one of them has passed without great and powerful enemies vying with each other and exhausting every effort to destroy it; still it survived in its entirety, and not only has the power of its foes failed to destroy even a single line, but it has not even been able materially to weaken its influence for any length of time. It still dominates the minds of a whole people, who venerate its contents as divine truth, and countless numbers have sacrificed their lives and their possessions to save it from perishing.

Emperor Hadrian and the Talmud

Hadrian was Emperor of the Roman World empire from 117 A.D. to his death, 138 A.D. In 132 A.D. the Jews began a revolt, and for four years carried on a bloody war. Otherwise Hadrian’s reign was peaceful.

The reason for this Pharisee revolt is told by Rodkinson in his History of the Talmud:

One of the causes of the great revolt against the Romans at this time was the prohibition by the Roman government of the study of the Torah [Talmud] … they rebelled, led by Bar Kochba. Rabbi Aqiba (Akiba) was the first to become his adherent, who journeyed from town to town, inciting the Israelites to rebel … It is not surprising, therefore, that Hadrian was not contented barely with the massacre of the sages of the Talmud, but was intent also on the destruction of the Talmud itself.

He decreed that if any of the old rabbis should qualify a young rabbi … both should be put to death … believing that with the death of the elder generation the Talmud would be forgotten and Israel would blend with the nations and its memory be obliterated; because he very well knew that as long as the Talmud existed there was little hope for the assimilation of the Jews with other nations. This decree however, was not executed … the efforts of Hadrian met with no success … He saw the Talmud still existing … uniting Israel into one people, and establishing it still more firmly as a national and religious whole … the Talmud regained its former power and influence.

And the pupil of one of the contemporary rabbis “Rabbi Jehudah the Nasi” (the “prince”) became “the compiler of the Mishnah” (or laws of the Talmud). (See Exhibit 14 and Exhibit 15) In 553 A.D. Emperor Justinian forbade the spread of the Talmudic books throughout the Roman Empire. (Corp. Juris. can. VII Decretal, lib V, Tit. IV, cap. 1)

The Popes and the Talmud

Writing of the battles of the Talmud and its followers, authored by the Pharisees (see Exhibit 10), we further read of events following the Sadducees, Samaritans, the followers of Jesus and the early Roman Emperors (Exhibit 9):

“The Rabbis next encountered the Popes. From the time of Pope Innocent III, the Talmud was burned at the stake in nearly every century from the 11th to the 18th in Italy, France, Germany, Spain, and many other countries …”

Rodkinson speaks of the disputations which the Popes and Kings held in which the accusers of the Talmud were answered by its defenders. The results were always that when the criminality of the Talmud was revealed in all its horror, the Talmud was ordered burned, expunged, or censored.

The same thing always started over again later. Rodkinson continues:

Still what has been the result? The Talmud exists today and not one letter in it is missing.

Rodkinson then lists a partial chart of the burning of the Talmud at the hands of Kings and Popes (See Exhibit 22 and Exhibit 23):

The Talmud at the Stake

Time Place Persecutor
1244 Paris King Louis IX

1244 Rome Innocent IV

1248 Paris Cardinal Legate Odo

1299 Paris Philip the Fair

1309 Paris Philip the Fair

1319 Toulouse Louis

1322 Rome Burned by order of Pope John XXII, and accompanied by robbery and murder of the Jews by the mob.

1553 Rome Pope Julius III – Similar burnings by the same order took place in Barcelona, Venice, Romagna, Urbino and Pesar. “Here three wagons full of books were burned: but first they were carried through the streets of the city, while royal officers proclaimed publicly that their condemnation was due to insults to Christianity which they contained.”

1554 Ancona, Ferrara, Mantua, Padua, Candia, and Ravenna Burned by hundreds and thousands.

1557 Poland Talmud burned because of the charge made against the Jews that they used the blood of Christian children in their ceremonies. This occurred during the Frankist disturbances.

1558 Rome Cardinal Chislieri

1559 Rome Sextus Sinensis

Jewish encyclopedias give credit, however, to various Popes for stopping violence against Jews; for seeking to convert them, and securing certain rights for them in territories over which they exercised temporal power.

Although the Bishops were issuing restrictive laws against Jewish aggressions long before this, the reign of Gregory the Great (590-604) is taken as the starting point of consistent relations between the Jews and the Popes. He condemned the holding of Christian slaves by Jews.

Pope Leo VII wrote the Archbishop of Mayence a reply telling him he might offer his Jews the choice between conversion or emigrating.

Anacletus II (antipope) was a Jew and his claim to the papacy always contested.

Benedictus VIII had a number of Jews put to death for blasphemy against Jesus.

Gregory VII charged the German emperor, Henry IV, with favoritism towards the Jews, and “in 1078 he renewed the canonical laws which prohibited giving Jews power over Christians … Jews might not be employed as tax-farmers or mint-masters.”

Pope Calixtus II (1119-24) and Pope Alexander III are cited for pro-Jewish acts.

Pope Innocent III is the most hated of the Popes in Jewish literature. In 1215, the Fourth Lateral Council, which he convened, “renewed the old canonical prohibitions against trusting the Jews with public offices and introduced the law demanding that Jews should wear a distinctive sign on their garments … Nevertheless he protected them against the fury of the French Crusaders.”

Pope Innocent III in a long decree stated: that Jews are not to be killed by anyone [but], they are to us dangerous as the insect in the apple, as the serpent in the breast … Since, therefore, they have already begun to gnaw like the rat, and to stink like the serpent, it is to our shame that the fire in our breast which is being eaten by them, does not consume them … Although Christian piety tolerates the Jews … and allows them to continue with us, although the Moors will not tolerate them, they must not be allowed to remain ungrateful to us in such a way as to repay us with contumely, for favors, and contempt for our familiarity. They are admitted to our familiarity only through our mercy …

Under this same Pope, Canons 67-70 were adopted by the Fourth Lateran Council, which included protective measures against Jewish usury; their wearing of a distinguishing badge (to warn Christians); forbidding intercourse with Christians, as employees, in marriage, arid barring their testimony as witnesses in legal matters (their license for perjury under the “Kol Nidre” then being well known).

“Gregory IX, … in various official documents insisted on the strict execution of the canonical laws against the Jews … his successor,” (to continue quoting) “Innocent IV, ordered the burning of the Talmud in Paris (1244).”

Through Emperor Sigismund, “who was heavily indebted to them, they [the Jews] obtained from Pope Martin V (1417-31) … various bulls (1418 and 1422)” (favorable to them). “In the last years of his pontificate, however, he repealed several of his ordinances, charging that they had been obtained under false pretenses.”

Popes Eugene IV and Nicholas V are cited for moderation.

Sixtus IV sanctioned the Spanish Inquisition, which was aimed at the “Marranos,” namely 300,000 Jews who had entered the Church, but retained their Talmudism, and secured power over all phases of Spanish life.

One who reads the Jewish press today will see congratulations to Israel from Spanish “Catholics” who identify themselves as Talmudic Jews descended from those who have practiced their Talmudism secretly ever since 1492, when their “Marrano” coreligionists were expelled from Spain.

If nothing else, the term “convert,” as applied to Jews, must be viewed cautiously, in view of the concealed Judaism of the “Marranos,” which continued for centuries.

One must learn, also, from Jewish authorities that Torquemada himself, leading the Inquisition, was a Jew, and that the Inquisition was only aimed at the Marranos who under the pretense of conversion had threatened to end Christianity by their inside machinations. (For further reference to the “Marranos,” see the book, The Marranos, by Cecil Roth, published by the Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia).

The Jewish Encyclopedia continues:

Alexander VI (Borgia), known in history as the most profligate of the Popes, was rather favorably inclined toward the Jews.

Leo X, one of the Medicis who fanned the Reformation by sponsoring a great renaissance of paganism and filled the Platonic Academy and salons of Rome and Florence with Jews, expounding Talmud and occult Cabalism, is called the humanist … favorably inclined toward the Jews, whom he employed not only as physicians, but also as artists and in other positions at his court. The beginning of the Reformation influenced his action in the controversy between Reuchlin and Pfeferkorn which he settled in such a way as not to give any encouragement to those who demanded reforms in the Church.

The story of the sincerely converted Jew, Pfefferkorn, who aired the infamies of the Talmud, as opposed by the Catholic renegade, Reuchlin, dupe of the head of the Jewish community of Rome, and the pro-Jewish Medici Pope, ended with Pfefferkorn being silenced, Reuchlin not being tried for heresy, as he was scheduled to be and indeed should have been, and with two hostile camps in nearly every German town taking sides for or against the Talmud.

One may ask: “How could anyone reading what the Talmud says [see reproductions elsewhere herein] argue about its contents?” In this regard, however, it must be remembered that only with the relatively unexpurgated Soncino translation of the Talmud in this century, in the contemporary language, English, has it become possible for the non-Jew to receive the full impact of what the Talmud says.

In other trials arguments could rage as to what a Yiddish or Hebrew text of the Talmud really meant, if translated. Nevertheless, the Jews always ultimately lost such arguments, as witness the condemnation of the Talmud by non-Jews through the centuries.

Even the Soncino English translation of the Talmud is not readily available except in major libraries, to be read there and not taken out.

Clement VII (another Medici servant of Jewry) was the bastard son of Guilio, brother of Lorenzo the Magnificent, who founded a pagan salon, the Platonic Academy. The Platonic Academy attempted the old Talmudic strategy of “harmonizing” pagan philosophy with Christianity, as Maimonides had tried to do with Biblical Judaism.

Lorenzo had his son Giovanni (Leo X) made a Cardinal, through his influence with Innocent VIII, at 13, having also been made an Archbishop at 7. Ready to ascend the throne, Giovanni promptly made five of his relatives Cardinals, including his bastard cousin, Giulio. Leo X (Giovanni), made Pope on March 11, 1513, was ordained a priest on the 15th and made a Bishop on the 19th of the same month, and he reigned until December 1, 1521, nine years.

It was this Pope, Leo X, who launched the selling of indulgences in 1517, the immediate cause of Luther’s break with the Church, and of Europe’s arousal. Every effort was made to corrupt and Talmudize the Church from the inside, while Jewry worked to wreck it from the outside. The hotheads among Jews, says Jewish historian Cecil Roth, expected to end Christianity and supplant it with Talmudism.

But when Luther nailed his theses on the Wittenberg Cathedral door, he nailed the Jews back into the ghetto, and Popes eager for Christian faith and morals were elected in place of the pro-Talmudic “humanist” Medici popes. Luther, in turn, found the same forces polluting his own following and ended his life beseeching the Protestant princes to expel or put at hard labor all Talmudists, after burning synagogues and Talmuds first of all. Read his words — if you can now find them other than here in any library!

There is only praise for the Medici Popes in Jewish literature and only disappointment about the condition of Jewry during the Reformation and afterward, for the succeeding Popes drove the Talmudists out of Vatican circles and back into the ghetto.

Bewailing this, the Jewish Encyclopedia reports how the Talmud was burned by Pope Julius III in 1553 and Christians prohibited from printing it. “The worst was yet to come.”

Paul IV (1555-1559) in his bull “Cum Nimis Absurdum” not only renewed all the canonical restrictions on Jews, but restricted their commercial activities and made them wear a yellow hat and live in their own territory — the ghetto.

Concerning this period, the Jews and the Medici, Jewish historian Cecil Roth states in his History of the Jews of Italy (Jewish Publication Society of America, 1946):

Girolamo Savonarola was successful … in 1494 the great Dominican drove out the Medici … Thereafter their position in the city (Florence) was a sort of barometer of its political state: when the Medici returned in 1512, they (the Jews) came too, and when the Medici were driven out in 1527 they accompanied them … It was only when the ruling house was at last securely established, from 1530 onwards, that the interruptions end and the continuous history of Florentine Jewry begins. (Page 190)

Also:

When Martin Luther nailed up his famous Theses on the cathedral door of Wittenberg, thereby setting the machinery of the Reformation in motion, the fate of the eager Jewries of Renaissance Italy were sealed. Threatened by this dangerous movement of secession, the Catholic Church began to set its house in order, more systematically and more comprehensively than ever before, in the process known as the Counter-Reformation.

No longer were the Popes to be pre-eminently enlightened patrons of literature, science and the arts, with worldly inclinations and interests. Henceforth they were chosen among those in whose eyes the requirements of the Church, spiritual and temporal, were paramount … who … regarded the Jews as a leaven of disbelief which positively endangered Christianity and Christendom — at least until they were segregated from intercourse with other men, as the Lateran Councils had prescribed three and a half centuries before.

Whereas the Talmud had been printed under Leo X, a Medici, in 1553, the Pope denounced the Talmud, and the other restrictions were set up. ( History of the Jews of Italy, pages 190 and following)

Pope Pius IV gave “a brief period of respite” (1566-72), [page 9] then his successor Pius V (1566-72) “not only repealed all the concessions of his predecessor, and not only renewed the laws of Paul IV, but added some new restrictions …” In 1569 he expelled the Jews from his territory.

Gregory XIII (1572-85) allowed the Jews to return but “introduced a large number of severe restrictions … and they were obliged to send every week at least 150 of their number” to listen to conversionist sermons.

Sixtus V (1585-90) “was more favorable to the Jews,” and permitted the printing of the Talmud after it was censored (1586). Clement VIII (1592-1604) ordered the Jews expelled and prohibited printing of the Talmud.

Under Clement X (1670-76) the Portugal Inquisition (against Jewry) was halted but he refused to help the expelled Jews of Vienna (1670). “The worst feature … under papal dominion was the closing of the gates of the Roman ghetto at nights. Severe penalties awaited a Jew leaving the ghetto after dark, or a Christian entering it.”

Pius VI (1775-1800) “renewed all the restrictions enacted from the 13th Century. The censorship of books was strictly enforced … and their attendance at conversionist sermons was enforced,” and Leo XII (1826) reinforced these rules with extreme rigor.

Pius IX (1846-78) started with a liberal attitude but, as stated in other Jewish literature, after he had been expelled from Rome at the hands of a Jewish movement which revealed its Talmudic anti-Christian face, he changed. To quote the Jewish Encyclopedia (”Popes”):

Pius IX during the first two years of his pontificate, was evidently inclined to adopt a liberal attitude, but after his return from exile he … condemned as abominable laws all measures which gave political freedom to them … showed his approval of the medieval laws as enacted by Innocent III. He maintained the ghetto in Rome until it was abolished by the Italian occupation of Rome (1870).

His successor, Leo XIII (1878-1903), was the first Pope who exercised no territorial jurisdiction over the Jews. His influence, nevertheless, was prejudicial to them. He encouraged anti-Semitism by bestowing distinctions on leading anti-Semitic politicians and authors, as Lueger and Drumont. [Note: Eduard Drumont’s book, La France Juive traces the attempted Talmudization of French Christian life in every phase. A Judaized France was the result he deplored and sought to avoid.]

He refused to interfere in behalf of Captain Dreyfus, or to issue a statement against the blood accusation. [Note that human blood is used in Talmudic black magic rituals.] In an official document he denounced Jews, Freemasons, and anarchists as the enemies of the Church.

The Index Expurgatrius issued by Leo XIII in 1887 stated concerning “The Talmud and other Jewish books:”

Although in the Index issued by Pope Pius IV, the Jewish Talmud with all its glossaries, annotations, interpretations and expositions were prohibited: but if published without the name Talmud and without its vile calumnies against the Christian religion they could be tolerated; however, Our Holy Lord Pope Clement VIII in his constitution against impious writings and Jewish books, published in Rome in the year of Our Lord 1592 … proscribed and condemned them.

It was not his intention thereby to permit or tolerate them even under the above conditions; for he expressly and specifically stated and willed, that the impious Talmudic Cabalistic and other nefarious books of the Jews be entirely condemned and that they must remain always condemned and prohibited, and that his Constitution about these books must be perpetually and inviolably observed.

The 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia states:

Pius X (elected 1903) is not sufficiently known to permit a judgment … but in his diocese of Mantua, before he became Pope, he had prohibited the celebration of a solemn mass on the King’s birthday because the city council which asked for it had attended a celebration in the synagogue. [Note: The quote is from the 1905 Jewish Encyclopedia, hence the incomplete reference.)

The Vatican’s semi-official organ, L’Osservatore Romano, of August 13, 1938, in an article headed “The Jews and the Vatican Council” (1870), after speaking of the Protective measures for the Jews by the Catholic Church, stated:

But — in order to set things straight — by this it was not intended that Jews should be allowed to abuse the hospitality of Christian countries. Along with these protective ordinances, there existed restrictive and precautionary decrees with regard to them. The civil power was in accord with the Church in this, since, as Delassus says, “they both had the same interest in preventing the nations from being invaded by the Jewish element and thereby losing control of society.”

But if Christians were forbidden to force Jews to embrace the Catholic religion, to disturb their synagogues, their Sabbaths and their festivals, the Jews, on the other hand, were forbidden to hold public office, civil or military; and this prohibition extended even to the children of converted Jews. The precautionary decrees concerned the professions, education, and business positions.

The Talmud and Martin Luther, the Father of Protestantism

When Pope Leo X started selling indulgences in 1517, this helped precipitate Luther’s break with the Church, and the nailing of his theses on the door of the Wittenberg Cathedral. Almost immediately Jews flocked to the new Protestant banner. Luther was sought after by 4 Jews. He in turn wrote a laudatory publication, “Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew,” filled with sympathy for their long unbelief, which Luther laid to the unsympathetic attitude of the Catholic Popes and hierarchy, and on his part welcoming the Jews to his heart.

Present-day Catholic and Protestant sources are largely ignorant, however, of the fact that, later, Luther found that Jews who had encouraged him to break with the Church were [page 10] attempting to Judaize his followers. He then read the Talmud, as introduced to him by a truly converted Jew. Afterward, he wrote “The Jews and Their Lies,” with such denunciatory philippics that they make parallel utterances of the Popes almost pale by comparison — this only after he became aware of the truth.

Luther wrote, in “The Jews and Their Lies:”

They exalt themselves and praise God for separating them from the heathen …In order that their raving, frantic and foolish nonsense might be perfect, they praise and thank God, first, that they are human beings and not animals; secondly, that they are Israelites and not Goyim (heathen); thirdly, that they were created as Men and not as Women. Such foolishness they do not have from Israel, but from Goyim.

For thus the historians write that the Greek Plato daily gave such praise and thanks to God, if such blasphemy and haughtiness could be called the praise of God. For that man [Plato] also praised his gods for these three things, that he was a man and not an animal, a man and not a woman, a Greek and not a non-Greek or barbarian. Such is the praying of a fool and the praise of a blasphemous barbarian; just as the Mals imagine that they alone are human beings and all the rest of the world nothing but inhuman beings, ducks, or mice.

As to these matters, note the Jewish Encyclopedia, Exhibit 273 (last of right column, “Gentiles”): “Judah ben Ilai recommends the daily recital of the benediction, ‘Blessed be thou … who hast not made me a goy.’” This also has: “who hast not made me a woman,” and also “who hast made me an Israelite … who hast not made me a slave.” This is a “benediction” prescribed by the Talmud. (See “Benedictions:” Jewish Encyclopedia)

Luther also quoted John 8:39 and verse 44, wherein Christ told the Pharisees: “Ye are of your father the Devil,” and warns Christians to “be on their guard against these hardened condemned people — who accuse God of lying and proudly despise the whole world … They are boastful, proud fools …” He goes on to call them “Liars and Bloodhounds.” Luther then cites the book of Esther. Catholic and Protestant theologians in all centuries have protested Esther as being unhistorical, irreligious (the name of God does not once appear in it) and out of place in the Bible.

Luther states:

They are the real liars and bloodhounds, who have perverted and falsified the entire Scriptures from beginning to end without ceasing, with their interpretations … O, how they love that book of Esther, which so nicely agrees with their revengeful people — they who imagine themselves to be the people of God, who desire to think they must murder and crush the heathen … As they at first demonstrated against us Christians and would like to do so now, if only they could …

Without any modern-day Jewish Encyclopedias or Soncino translations of the Babylonian Talmud, one sees that Luther nevertheless understood perfectly the way the Talmud blasphemes and hangs obscene charges on Christ through double talk and words (the Balaam passages of the Talmud are an example of this, but Luther names others). Luther recognized that any Messiah expected by Jewry was only supposed to lead them in slaughter to power, stating:

The Jews desire no more from their Messiah than that he should be a Kochba” (leader of the Pharisee revolt against Rome in 135 A.D., in which according to historian Gibbon, about a million non-Jews were sadistically slaughtered) “and a worldly king, who would slay the Christians, divide the world among the Jews and make them rich lords …

Luther reflected upon that passage in II Peter 2 about those who “speak great swelling words of vanity,” promise liberty, but “they themselves are the servants of corruption … For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they had known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them … according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to its wallowing in the mire.”

Luther also wrote:

How much better it would be if they did not have God’s Commandment or did not know it. For if they did not have it, they would be uncondemned. They are condemned because they have God’s Commandment and do not keep it, but act against it without ceasing … In like manner murderers and whores, thieves and scoundrels and all evil men could boast they are God’s holy and chosen people, because they have His Word and know that they should fear and obey him …

By then Luther knew the Talmud, and he continued:

The heathen philosophers write much more honorably … They write that man by nature is obligated to serve others, also to keep his word to his enemies … Yea, I maintain that in three fables of Aesop there is more wisdom to be found than in all the books of Talmudists and Rabbis and more than ever could come into the hearts of the Jews. Should someone think I am saying too much — I am not saying too much, but much too little! For I see in their writings how they curse us Goyim and wish us all evil in their schools and prayers. They rob us of our money through usury … they play us all manner of mean tricks; what is worst of all, they … teach that such should be done. No Heathen has done such things and none would do so except the Devil himself, and those whom he possesses like he possesses the Jews.

Luther continued as to the Talmud:

Thus they call Him [Jesus] the child of a whore and His mother, Mary, a whore, whom she had in adultery … Reluctantly I must speak so coarsely in opposing the Devil … We do not call our wives whores as they call Maria, the Mother of Jesus; we do not call them bastards, as they call our Lord Christ. We do not curse them, but wish them all manner of bodily and spiritual good; permit them to lodge with us. We don’t steal and mutilate their children; do not poison their water; do not thirst after their blood …

Now behold what a nice, thick, fat lie it is when they complain about being captives among us. Jerusalem was destroyed more than 1400 years ago and during that time we Christians have been tortured and persecuted by Jews in all the world. For nearly 300 years we might well complain that during that time they captured and killed the Christians, which is the clear truth.

On top of that, we do not know to this day what Devil brought them into our country. We did not fetch them from Jerusalem. On top of that no one is holding them now. Land and highways are open to them … They are a heavy burden to us in our country, like a plague, pestilence, and nothing but misfortune … Should the Devil not laugh and dance, when in this manner he can have his paradise among us Christians … and to thank us … blasphemes and curses God and man! … Now what are we going to do with these rejected condemned Jewish people?

After Luther became conversant with the Talmud and the ritual cursings of so-called “Judaism,” his counsel exactly matched that of the ever-reinforced edicts of the beleaguered Popes. A person who condones such blasphemies, he said, partakes of them. He said they should be forced to leave the country:

We should not suffer it, after they are among us and we knew about such lying, blaspheming and cursing among them, lest we become partakers of their lies, cursing and blaspheming … We are not permitted to take revenge. Revenge is around their necks a thousand times greater than we could wish them. I will give you my true counsel:

First, that we avoid their synagogues and schools and warn people against them … that God may see that we are Christians and have not knowingly tolerated such lying, cursing and blaspheming of His Son and His Christians. For what we have so far tolerated in ignorance (I myself did not know it), God will forgive us … Moses writes in Deuteronomy that where a city practiced idolatry, it should be entirely destroyed with fire and nothing left. If he were living today he would be the first to put fire to the Jew schools and houses [which Luther follows with Scriptural support].

Secondly: That all of their books be taken away; prayer books, Talmuds, and not one page of it be left … For they use all that only to blaspheme the son of God; that is God Himself … and will never use it in any other way.

Spiritually, Luther connects the Jews with those who betrayed Moses: “Of such are the remaining dregs of the Jews, of whom Moses knows nothing; they also know nothing of him, for they do not keep one passage in Moses.”

This reminds one of the constantly recurring charge of Christ that the Pharisees violated and nullified the laws of Moses, such as: “The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses seat.” (Matt. 23:2) In other words, they occupy his throne giving forth as Mosaic Law, their own foul permissions which they attribute to “Oral” laws Moses handed down to their group, unknown to the rest of the world.

In 1543 Luther replied to the Talmudic charge that Jesus did His miracles by magic with the Tetragrammaton, or Shem Hamphorash, the consonants of the word Jehovah (by which Rabbis supposedly summon demons).

Even with no further evidence than the Old Testament, I would maintain … that the Jews, as they are today, are veritably a mixture of all the depraved and malevolent knaves of the whole world over … to afflict the different Nations with their usury, to spy upon others, and to betray, to poison wells, to deceive and to kidnap children — in short, to practice all kinds of dishonesty and injury.

Digressing from Luther’s “The Jews and Their Lies,” we see in Luther’s “Table Talk” his view of the “converted” Jew:

If a Jew, not converted at heart, were to ask baptism at my hands, I would take him on to the bridge, tie a stone round his neck, and hurl him into the river; for these wretches are wont to make a jest of our religion. (CCLVI)

It is evident that Luther became familiar with the custom, wherever it did not endanger Jews, of spitting in the synagogue when reference to Christianity is sung in the Alenu, for he advised:

Whenever you see or think about a Jew, say to yourself as follows: Behold, the mouth which I see there has every Saturday cursed, execrated, and spit upon my dear Lord, Jesus Christ, who has redeemed me with His precious blood; and also prayed and cursed before God that I, my wife and children, and all Christians, should be stabbed and perish in the most miserable manner — and would like to do so himself if he could, that he might come into possession of our goods … Should I eat, drink with, or speak to such a Devilish mouth? … I would partake of all the Devils who live in that Jew, and would spit upon the precious blood of Christ — God keep me from doing that.

Luther’s Last Sermon

Repeatedly, Luther warns the clergy against participation in the blasphemies of Judaism, by aiding or enduring these in any way. His last sermon included this:

You, Milords and men of authority, should not tolerate but expel them. They are our public enemies and incessantly blaspheme our Lord Jesus Christ; they call our blessed Virgin Mary a harlot and Her Son a bastard … if they could kill us all, they would gladly do so; in fact many of them murder Christians, especially those professing to be surgeons and doctors.

They know how to deal with medicaments in the manner of the Italians — the Borgias and Medicis — who gave people poison which brought about their death in one hour or a month … As a good patriot I wanted to give you this warning for the very last time to deter you from participating in alien sins. You must know I only desire the best for you all, rulers and subjects.

Posted by Noor al Haqiqa at 11:36 PM

Labels: , , , , ,

EU Lawyers: We’ve a List of Zionist War Criminals

Link

10/27/2009 05:05:00 PM Author Editor Publisher Hiyam Noir

EU lawyers: We've list of Zionist war criminals


27-10-2009,12:36

Al Qassam Website and Agencies – Human rights lawyers and pro-Palestinian activists in a number of European countries hold lists with names of Zionist Occupation Forces soldiers allegedly linked to war crimes committed during the Last War on the Gaza Strip. Existing legislation enables arrest warrants to be issued against these officers if they enter those countries.

Lawyers in Britain and other European countries have been collecting testimonies of Palestinians and other data from Gaza since January, which they maintain proves that war crimes were committed by the ZOF during the offensive. The evidence is linked to ZOF officers holding ranks of battalion commander and higher, who were in command during various stages of the war.

The other nations who have lawyers collecting information on the matter include the Netherlands, Spain, Belgium and Norway, whose laws, as well as Britain’s, allow the issuance of arrest warrants against foreign citizens suspected of war crimes.

Attorney Daniel Makover from London is coordinating the efforts in Britain. One of his colleagues visited the Gaza Strip several weeks after the fighting in order to collect testimonies. Palestinians civilians also gave the legal assistant their approval, and asked that he file the suits in their name, in line with British law.

Speaking to Haaretz, Makover refused to offer details on the identity of the ZOF officers or how many were listed, but said that much depends on the specific details of each case. Makover said that anyone who was involved in an incident may face criminal charges. The attorney added that there are officers who are obviously candidates for charges, and others who are less obvious, but emphasized that it depends on the facts collected on the ground.

Makover said that the Goldstone report on the fighting in the Gaza Strip will bolster the efforts of the activists, and said that some of the instances mentioned in the report were already known to the attorneys. Makover is part of an unofficial network of attorneys operating in various countries in Europe, exchanging and sharing information so that suspected officers may be arrested in those countries.

The information is often received from pro-Palestinian activists who follow Jewish or pro-Israel groups that invite ZOF officers to deliver lectures. In some instances, this information is relayed to border controls. Makover said that a small number of names of ZOF officers is already on a British police watch list, and that when they arrive in Britain the authorities will issue an arrest warrant that will lead to their possible detention.

A number of human rights groups are busy working to create an international organization that would enable closer surveillance of those they suspect of war crimes and torture, as well as seek warrants for their arrest.

The ZOF did not wish to specify the instructions it has given to officers before they travel abroad. In practice, many of the officers who participated in the Gaza War have been asked to consult with legal experts at the Foreign Ministry, where they are instructed how to behave abroad and where they need to lower the profile of their identity; in some cases they are advised not to visit certain countries.

The Foreign Ministry released a statement saying: “The ministry is aware of efforts undertaken by Palestinian groups and their supporters to harm ZOF officers through legal and public relations means, and is working to prevent such efforts.”

International Coalition Against War Criminals

© PalestineFreeVoice Copyright reserved 2003 – 2011
Intellectual Rights Retained

A Tsunami Called Goldstone

Where Have All the Friendships Gone?
A Tsunami Called Goldstone

By URI AVNERY

According to a Chinese saying, if someone in the street tells you that you are drunk, you can laugh. If a second person tells you that you are drunk, start to think about it. If a third one tells you the same, go home and sleep it off.

Our political and military leadership has already encountered the third, fourth and fifth person. All of them say that they must investigate what happened in the “Molten Lead” operation.

They have three options:

– to conduct a real investigation.

– to ignore the demand and proceed as if nothing has happened.

– to conduct a sham inquiry.

* * *

IT IS easy to dismiss the first option: it has not the slightest chance of being adopted. Except for the usual suspects (including myself) who demanded an investigation long before anyone in Israel had heard of a judge called Goldstone, nobody supports it.

Among all the members of our political, military and media establishments who are now suggesting an “inquiry”, there is no one – literally not one – who means by that a real investigation. The aim is to deceive the Goyim and get them to shut up.

Actually, Israeli law lays down clear guidelines for such investigations. The government decides to set up a commission of investigation. The president of the Supreme Court then appoints the members of the commission. The commission can compel witnesses to testify. Anybody who may be damaged by its conclusions must be warned and given the opportunity to defend themself. Its conclusions are binding.

This law has an interesting history. Sometime in the 50s, David Ben-Gurion demanded the appointment of a “judicial committee of inquiry” to decide who gave the orders for the 1954 “security mishap”, also known as the Lavon Affair. (A false flag operation where an espionage network composed of local Jews was activated to bomb American and British offices in Egypt, in order to cause friction between Egypt and the Western powers. The perpetrators were caught.)

Ben-Gurion’s request was denied, under the pretext that there was no law for such a procedure. Furious, Ben-Gurion resigned from the government and left his party. In one of the stormy party sessions, the Minister of Justice, Yaakov Shimshon Shapira, called Ben-Gurion a “fascist”. But Shapira, an old Russian Jew, regretted his outburst later. He drafted a special law for the appointment of Commissions of Investigation in the future. After lengthy deliberations in the Knesset (in which I took an active part) the law was adopted and has since been applied, notably in the case of the Sabra and Shatila massacre.

Now I wholeheartedly support the setting up of a Commission of Investigation according to this law.

* * *

THE SECOND option is the one proposed by the army Chief of Staff and the Minister of Defense. In America it is called “stonewalling”. Meaning: To hell with it.

The army commanders object to any investigation and any inquiry whatsoever. They probably know why. After all, they know the facts. They know that a dark shadow lies over the very decision to go to war, over the planning of the operation, over the instructions given to the troops, and over many dozens of large and small acts committed during the operation.

In their opinion, even if their refusal has severe international repercussions, the consequences of any investigation, even a phony one, would be far worse.

As long as the Chief of Staff sticks to this position, there will be no investigation outside the army, whatever the attitude of the ministers. The army chief, who attends every cabinet meeting, is the largest figure in the room. When he announces that such and such is the “position of the army”, no mere politician present would dare to object.

In the “Only Democracy in the Middle East”, the law (proposed at the time by Menachem Begin) stipulates that the Government as such is the Commander in Chief of the Israel Defense Forces. That is the theory. In practice, no decision at variance with the “position of the army” has ever been or will ever be adopted.

The army claims to be investigating itself. Ehud Barak represents – willingly or unwillingly – this position. The cabinet has postponed dealing with the matter, and that’s where things stand today.

* * *

ON THIS occasion, the spotlight should be turned on the least visible person in Israel: the Chief of the General Staff, Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi, the ultimate Teflon-man. Nothing sticks to him. In this debate, as in all others, he just is not there.

Everybody knows that Ashkenazi is a shy and modest man. He hardly ever speaks, writes or speechifies. On television, he merges into the background.

This is how he looks to the public: an honest soldier, without tricks or ploys, who does his duty quietly, receives his orders from the government and fulfills them loyally. In this he differs from almost all his predecessors, who were boastful, publicity-crazy and loquacious. While most them came from famous elite units or the arrogant Air Force, he is a grey infantry man. The Duke of Wellington, seeing the huge amount of paperwork in his army, once exclaimed: “Soldiers should fight, not write!” He would have liked Ashkenazi

But reality is not always what it seems. Ashkenazi plays a central role in the decision-making process. He was appointed after his predecessor, Dan Halutz, resigned after the failures of Lebanon War II. Under Ashkenazi’s leadership, new doctrines were formulated and put into action in the “Molten Lead” operation. I defined them (on my own responsibility) as “Zero Losses” and “Better to kill a hundred enemy civilians than to lose one of our own soldiers”. Since the Gaza war did not lead to a single soldier being put on trial, Ashkenazi must bear the responsibility for everything that happened there.

If an indictment were issued by the International Court in The Hague, Ashkenazi would probably be accorded the place of honor as “Defendant No. 1”. No wonder that he objects to any outside investigation, as does Ehud Barak, who would probably occupy the No. 2 place.

* * *

THE POLITICIANS who oppose (ever so quietly) the Chief of Staff’s position believe that it is impossible to withstand international pressure completely, and that some kind of an inquiry will have to be conducted. Since not one of them intends to hold a real investigation, they propose to follow a tried and trusted Israeli method, which has worked wonderfully hundreds of times in the past: the method of sham.

A sham inquiry. Sham conclusions. Sham adherence to international law. Sham civilian control over the military.

Nothing simpler than that. An “inquiry committee” (but not a Commission of Investigation according to the law) will be set up, chaired by a suitably patriotic judge and composed of carefully chosen honorable citizens who are all “one of us”. Testimonies will be heard behind closed doors (for considerations of security, of course). Army lawyers will prove that everything was perfectly legal, the National Whitewasher, Professor Asa Kasher, will laud the ethics of the Most Moral Army in the World. Generals will speak about our inalienable right to self-defense. In the end, two or three junior officers or privates may be found guilty of “irregularities”.

Israel’s friends all over the world will break into an ecstatic chorus: What a lawful state! What a democracy! What morality! Western governments will declare that justice has been done and the case closed. The US veto will see to the rest.

So why don’t the army chiefs accept this proposal? Because they are afraid things might not proceed quite so smoothly. The international community will demand that at least part of the hearings be conducted in open court. There will be a demand for the presence of international observers. And, most importantly: there will be no justifiable way to exclude the testimonies of the Gazans themselves. Things will get complicated. The world will not accept fabricated conclusions. In the end we will be in exactly the same situation. Better to stay put and brave it out, whatever the price.

* * *

IN THE meantime, international pressure on Israel is increasing. Even now it has reached unprecedented proportions.

Russia and China have voted in favor of the endorsement of the Goldstone report by the UN. The UK and France “did not take part in the vote”, but demanded that Israel conduct a real investigation. We have quarreled with Turkey, until now an important military ally. We have altercations with Sweden, Norway and a number of other friendly countries. The French Foreign Minister has been prevented from crossing into the Gaza Strip and is furious. The already cold peace with Egypt and Jordan has become several degrees colder. Israel is boycotted in many forums. Senior army officers are afraid to travel abroad for fear of arrest.

This raises the question once more: can outside pressure have an impact on Israel?

Certainly it can. The question is: what kind of pressure, what kind of impact?

The pressure has indeed convinced several ministers that an inquiry committee for the Goldstone report has to be set up. But no one in the Israeli establishment – no one at all! – has raised the real question: Perhaps Goldstone is right? Except for the usual suspects, no one in the media, the Knesset or the government has asked: Perhaps war crimes have indeed been committed? The outside pressure has not forced such questions to be raised. They must come from the inside, from the public itself.

The kind of pressure must also be considered. The Goldstone report has an impact on the world because it is precise and targeted: a specific operation, for which specific persons are responsible. It raises a specific demand: an investigation. It attacks a clear and well-defined target: war crimes.

If we apply this to the debate about boycotting Israel: the Goldstone report may be compared to a targeted boycott on the settlements and their helpers, not an unlimited boycott of the State of Israel. A targeted boycott can have a positive impact. A comprehensive, unlimited boycott would – in my opinion – achieve the opposite. It would push the Israeli public further into the arms of the extreme Right.

The struggle over the Goldstone report is now at its height. In Jerusalem, the rising energy of the waves can be clearly felt. Does this portend a tsunami?

Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch’s book The Politics of Anti-Semitism

%d bloggers like this: