Gilad Atzmon: Hello, Is It Muammar?


Monday, February 28, 2011 at 12:31AM Gilad Atzmon
Tony Blair with Muammar Gaddafi in 2007Tony Blair, widely criticised in recent days for offering Muammar Gaddafi “the hand of friendship” seven years ago, made an extraordinary personal intervention when he twice phoned the embattled Libyan dictator on Friday and asked him to stop killing protesters rising up against the regime.

I would like to remind every ethically aware human being that  Blair’s hands are soaked with the blood of 1.5 million Iraqi fatalities who died in an illegal war he himself launched.  Blair clearly didn’t stop himself from launching a war when 4 millions Britons called him to do so.  Blair should be the last to preach peace and harmony. The Ex British PM should be locked behind bars and disappear from our life once and for all.  

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian


This amazing event took place in Tahrir Square in celebration of the departure of Mubark where two million people gathered and prayed together. The prayer was lead by the Islamic scholar Yussuf Al-Qaradawi

And this is how this magnificent event was described by Amira Hass in the Haaretz

“Those who stayed home could see and hear the Islamic scholar Sheikh Yussuf al-Qardawi give the Friday sermon from the square’s southern stage, after 30 years in exile. Those close enough to the stage could hear him. But most of those who came to pray in the square created small groups of their own. {{{ as you can see in the video link above !!! }}} One demonstrator commented that the Muslim Brotherhood was striving for prominence now because during the revolution, it proved to have fewer followers than Egyptians had been to taught to fear

Posted by nahida the Exiled Palestinian at 2:22:00 AM





Atzmon’s story of how he converted from zionism through his love of jazz is phenomenal!

Posted by Noor al Haqiqa at 7:42 PM

This is NOT Tahrir Square!

>Commented by Debbie Manon

Must watch YouTube – 100,000 Strong

Americans do have a capacity for turning things like this into festivals.  You will note that the local Fire Department band is out entertaining the folks.

Crooked politicians really don’t have to learn, they already know… they just believe it can’t happen to them. That is what they have yet to learn.

Apparently, it also is widely believed in America that the Army will not shoot civilians the same way they do in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. They have forgotten Kent State.  And, that was before they had Blackwater and Xe hired guns who will shoot their grandomothers if someone will pay them to do it.

This article by Shamir still remains one of the Top of my list of  favorites…HANG THEM HIGH!  

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Its time for Palestine’s ‘Libyan moment’


No true Palestinian would argue with Electronic Ali saying that “Palestinian Authority has proved not to be a step toward the “legitimate rights of the Palestinian people,” but rather a significant obstacle in the way of achieving them.” and saying “This would not be a surrender.”. It is not a surrender, its a victory

But, I am wondering if Electronic Ali’s call for dissoving the PA, includes dissoving Hamas Authority, and wondering if would dare to say, after Mubarak’s moment,  “it is time for the” Hamas who, according to electronic Ali “offered no coherent political vision to get Palestinians out of their impasse and its rule in Gaza has increasingly begun to resemble that of its Fatah counterparts in the West Bank.” to have its Mubarak moment and “dissolve itself and ….. announcing that the responsibilities delegated to it by Israel are being handed back to the occupying power, which must fulfill its duties under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949.”


Electronic Ali is right PA in Ramallah “is acting in the Israel’s interest”

I would add, as late Mahmod Darwish noticed the PLO signed OSLO to solve the Problem of PLO leader ship. Therefore, Elecrocnic Ali’s call for PA in Ramallah to dissolve itself is an illusion.

Ali’s likes such as Mazin Qumsiyeh and others leading the popular resistance, instead of following the steps of revolutions in Tunis, Egypt, Libya and in other Arab regimes, and demand FULL LIBERATION they are calling for reconciliation with the thieves, mass murderers, and genocidal supremacists.

Both Ali, Mazin and their likes are doing their best to hide their “Hamasophobia”, to put popular resistance, as an alternative for armed resistance, to promote the illusion of equal rights in nazi-like Israel, and the illusion of peace with zionism. They forget that the road to Oslo started with PLO calling for a secular state and ended with “Palestinian Papers”
Both listened to the truth Gilad Atzmon (my Hebrew speaking brother) in Stuttgart who dared to cross the Jewish, Marxists activist’s red lines, and both seen their friends demanding removal of Gilad from the protocol.
“I was obviously sad about it — I believed that those who advocated the ‘One State solution’ should be able to support intellectual pluralism — But it turns out that a few of those who promote democracy in Palestine would be better advised to first confront their own Stalinist tendencies.” Gilad wrote.
Thanks to Evelyn Hecht-Galinski who firmly announced that if Gilad “was to be removed from the protocol,”for telling the truth about both Jewish and Israeli culture,  then she also wanted to be removed”.


Later Arbeiterfotografie, (the group who documented the conference) transcribed Gilad’s talk and considered it “most convincing and humane”. They thought that it should be ‘disseminated widely’ 
“I guess that truth cannot be suppressed anymore — not even in Germany. If Israel defines itself as a Jewish State, then surely, it is our duty to question what Jewishness is all about. I believe that solidarity with Palestine becomes a more meaningful event once we are brave enough to stand for the truth. Rather than fit ourselves into any given consensus or discourse, our duty is to present an alternative reality, whilst aiming at ethics and beauty. For Justice to prevail, truth must be told.”

Yes, truth bits, but must be told.
The Truth on the “disagreement between Fatah and Hamas” and between PLO and Hamas has been the illusion of peace with Zionism.

Its time for Palestine’s ‘Libyan moment’ against Dayton’s army. Its time to answer the begging question: “When given the freedom to vote, why do people in the Middle East end up voting for “Islamists” ?”

The answer is:  “Nothing short of FULL LIBERATION of Palestine is acceptable!”


Toward Palestine’s ‘Mubarak moment’

The Palestinian Authority should dissolve itself, as it is acting in Israel’s interest, writer says.
Ali Abunimah Last Modified: 24 Feb 2011 16:25 GMT

New elections will not give Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas the credibility he needs, writer says [Reuters]

The slow collapse of Palestinian collective leadership institutions in recent years has reached a crisis amid the ongoing Arab revolutions, the revelations in the Palestine Papers, and the absence of any credible peace process.

The Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority (PA) controlled by Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah faction has attempted to respond to this crisis by calling elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) and the PA presidency.

Abbas hopes that elections could restore legitimacy to his leadership. Hamas has rejected such elections in the absence of a reconciliation agreement ending the division that resulted from Fatah’s refusal (along with Israel and the PA’s western sponsors, especially the United States) to accept the result of the last election in 2006, which Hamas decisively won.

But even if such an election were held in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, it does not resolve the crisis of collective leadership faced by the entire Palestinian people, some ten million distributed between those living in the occupied Gaza Strip and West Bank, inside Israel, and the worldwide diaspora.

A house divided

There are numerous reasons to oppose new PA elections, even if Hamas and Fatah were to sort out their differences. The experience since 2006 demonstrates that democracy, governance and normal politics are impossible under Israel’s brutal military occupation.

The Palestinian body politic was divided not into two broad political streams offering competing visions, as in other electoral democracies, but one stream that is aligned with, supported by and dependent on the occupation and its foreign sponsors, and another that remains committed, at least nominally, to resistance. These are contradictions that cannot be resolved through elections.

The Ramallah PA under Abbas today functions as an arm of the Israeli occupation, while Hamas, its cadres jailed, tortured and repressed in the West Bank by Israel and Abbas’ forces, is besieged in Gaza where it tries to govern. Meanwhile, Hamas has offered no coherent political vision to get Palestinians out of their impasse and its rule in Gaza has increasingly begun to resemble that of its Fatah counterparts in the West Bank.

The PA was created by agreement between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel under the Oslo Accords. The September 13, 1993 “Declaration of Principles” signed by the parties states that:

“The aim of the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations within the current Middle East peace process is, among other things, to establish a Palestinian Interim Self-Government Authority, the elected Council (the “Council”), for the Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, for a transitional period not exceeding five years, leading to a permanent settlement based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338.”

Under the agreement, PA elections would “constitute a significant interim preparatory step toward the realization of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and their just requirements”.

Small mandate

Thus, the PA was only ever intended to be temporary, transitional, and its mandate limited to a mere fraction of the Palestinian people, those in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Oslo Accords specifically limited the PA’s powers to functions delegated to it by Israel under the agreement.

Therefore, elections for the PLC will not resolve the issue of representation, for the Palestinian people as a whole. Most would not have a vote. As in previous elections, Israel would likely intervene, particularly in East Jerusalem to attempt to prevent even some Palestinians under occupation from voting.

Given all these conditions, a newly elected PLC would only serve to further entrench divisions among Palestinians while also creating the illusion that Palestinian self-governance exists — and can thrive — under Israeli occupation.

A decade and a half after its creation, the Palestinian Authority has proved not to be a step toward the “legitimate rights of the Palestinian people,” but rather a significant obstacle in the way of achieving them.

The PA offers no genuine self-government or protection for Palestinians under occupation, who continue to be victimized, killed, maimed and besieged by Israel with impunity while Israel confiscates and colonizes their land.

The PA never was and cannot be a stand-in for real collective leadership for the Palestinian people as a whole, and PA elections are not a substitute for self-determination.

Dissolving the PA

With the complete collapse of the “peace process” — the final push given by the Palestine Papers — it is time for the PA to have its Mubarak moment. When the Egyptian tyrant finally left office on February 11, he handed power over to the armed forces.

This would not be a surrender. Rather, it would be a recognition of reality and an act of resistance on the part of Palestinians who would collectively refuse to continue to assist the occupier in occupying them. By removing the fig leaf of “self-governance” masking and protecting from scrutiny Israel’s colonial and military tyranny, the end of the PA would expose Israeli apartheid for all the world to see.

The same message would also go to the European Union and the United States who have been directly subsidizing Israel’s occupation and colonization through the ruse of “aid” to the Palestinians and training for security forces that act as Israeli proxies. If the European Union wishes to continue funding Israel’s occupation, it ought to have the integrity to do it openly and not use Palestinians or the peace process as a front.

Dissolving the PA may cause some hardship and uncertainty for the tens of thousands of Palestinians and their dependents, who rely on salaries paid by the European Union via the PA. But the Palestinian people as a whole — the millions who have been victimised and marginalised by Oslo — would stand to benefit much more.

Handing the PA’s delegated powers back to the occupier would free Palestinians to focus on reconstituting their collective body politic and implementing strategies to really liberate themselves from Israeli colonial rule.

New leadership

What can a real collective Palestinian leadership look like? Undoubtedly this is a tough challenge. Many older Palestinians recall fondly the heyday of the PLO. The PLO still exists, of course, but its organs have long since lost any legitimacy or representative function. They are now mere rubber stamps in the hands of Abbas and his narrow circle.

Could the PLO be reconstituted as a truly representative body by, say, electing a new Palestine National Council (PNC) — the PLO’s “parliament in exile”? Although the PNC was supposed to be elected by the Palestinian people, in reality that has never happened — in part due to the practical difficulty of actually holding elections across the Palestinian diaspora. Members were always appointed through negotiations among the various political factions and the PNC included seats for independents and representatives from student, women’s and other organizations affiliated with the PLO.

One of the key points of disagreement between Fatah and Hamas has been reform of the PLO in which Hamas would become a member and receive a proportional number of seats on the organization’s various governing bodies. But even if this happened, it would not be the same as having Palestinians choose their representatives directly.

Yet if Arab countries which host large Palestinian refugee populations undergo democratic transformations, new possibilities for Palestinian politics will open up.

In recent years, “out of country voting” facilities were provided for large Iraqi and Afghan refugee and exile populations for elections sponsored by the powers occupying those countries. In theory, it would be possible to hold elections for all Palestinians, perhaps under UN auspices — including the huge Palestinian diaspora in the Americas and Europe.

The trouble is that any such elections would probably need to rely on the goodwill and cooperation of an “international community” (the US and its allies), which has been implacably opposed to allowing Palestinians to choose their own leaders.

Would the energy and expense of running a transnational Palestinian bureaucracy be worth it? Would these new bodies be vulnerable to the sorts of subversion, cooptation, and corruption that turned the original PLO from a national liberation movement into its current sad status where it has been hijacked by a collaborationist clique?

I do not have definitive answers to these questions, but they strike me as the ones Palestinians ought now to be debating.

Inspirational boycott

In light of the Arab revolutions that were leaderless, another intriguing possibility is that at this stage Palestinians should not worry about creating representative bodies.

Instead, they should focus on powerful, decentralized resistance, particularly boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) internationally, and the popular struggle within historic Palestine.

The BDS movement does have a collective leadership in the form of the Boycott National Committee (BNC). However, this is not a leadership that issues orders and instructions Palestinians or solidarity organisations around the world. Rather, it sets an agenda reflecting a broad Palestinian consensus, and campaigns for others to work according to this agenda, largely through moral suasion.

The agenda encompasses the needs and rights of all Palestinians: ending the occupation and colonisation of all Arab territories occupied in 1967; ending all forms of discrimination against Palestinian citizens in Israel; and respecting, promoting and implementing the rights of Palestinian refugees.

The BDS campaign is powerful and growing because it is decentralized and those around the world working for the boycott of Israel — following the precedent of apartheid South Africa — are doing so independently. There is no central body for Israel and its allies to sabotage and attack.

This might be the model to follow: let us continue to build up our strength through campaigning, civil resistance and activism. Two months ago, few could have imagined that the decades old regimes of Tunisia’s Zine el Abidine Ben Ali and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak would fall — but fall they did under the weight of massive, broad-based popular protests. Indeed, such movements hold much greater promise to end Israel’s apartheid regime and produce a genuine, representative and democratic Palestinian leadership than the kinds of cumbersome institutions created by the Oslo Accords. The end of the peace process is only the beginning.

Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, a policy advisor with the Palestinian Policy Network, and author of One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Such Spirit Cannot be Destroyed

To be able to smile, sing and dance after the trauma experienced by those kids- some of whom laid for days amongst the corpses of their parents- is no less than a miracle

Thank you Ken for such gifts of dedication, humanity and bravery


10-year-old survivor describes the murder of her family


Who is behind turmoil in Libya?

>Posted on February 27, 2011 by rehmat1

“So I came back to see him (a General at the Petagon) a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs”—meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office—”today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”, said General Wesley Clark in an interview with DemocracyNow!, March 2, 2007.

Both the former Cuban leader Fidel Castro and Venezuelan senior diplamat hves blamed Washington for creating the terrible situation in Libya in order to invade and occupy the oil-rich country.
“The government of the United States is not concerned at all about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate to give NATO the order to invade that rich country, perhaps in a question of hours or very short days,” Castro wrote in a column published Tuesday by Cuban state news media.

The Zionist poodle, US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton who supported Israeli bloodshed of Arabs in Lebanon (2006) and Gaza (2008-09), was quick to condemn Libyan dictator Qaddafi: “This bloodshed is completely unacceptable”.

Stephen Lendman, an American writer and radio show-host – in an interview with Iranian Press TV, said: “When NATO, when an ally is being attacked, you don’t get reports in the US media, they’re suppressed. It was wall to wall Egypt when those protests were going on. It’s wall to wall Libya now with the protests going on. I smell a rat. Again I despise Gaddafi. Libyans deserve much better than him. They have for many years. But I suspect that Washington is doing the pushing”.

It’s interesting to note that the same American Jewish lobby groups which first supported Hosni Mubarak’s regime and later the take-over of pro-Israel military junta in Cairo – are now supporting the regime-change in Libya.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has thrown its support behind the pro-democracy protests and has announced its readiness to send humanitarian aid to the victims of Qaddafi’s military crackdown. Tehran has also announced that it would make every effort to determine the fate of the missing Lebanese Shia leader Imam Moussa al-Sadr, Mehmanparast concluded. Imam Moussa al-Sadr went missing during an official visit to Tripoli to meet with officials from the government of Gaddafi in August 1978. It is widely believed in Lebanon that al-Sadr, the founder of Lebanon’s Amal movement, was kidnapped by the order of senior Libyan officials. Accompanied by two of his companions, Mohammed Yaqoub and Abbas Badreddin, Sadr was scheduled to meet with Libyan officials. In 2008, the Beirut government issued an arrest warrant for Qaddafi over Sadr’s disappearance.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

%d bloggers like this: