Did the Age of Enlightenment never occur?

Did the Age of Enlightenment never occur?

Book Burning Jewish Settlers Style
Book Burning Nazi Style
Book Burning Christian Extremists Style
Book Burning Muslim Extremists Style

Recently, my article, this blog and myself have come under attack -not by Zionists, but by two members of the our local Friends of Palestine group (FoP), as well as by a local anti-Zionist Jewish group.

A letter, signed by Messrs G.D and T.B, which was explicitly supported by this anti-Zionist Jewish group was sent to the chair and secretary of the FoP. In this letter they accuse me of writing a “racist [sic]” article “against the Jews [sic]”. Using this false accusations as a pretext, they demanded the “urgent” and “nonnegotiable [sic]” removal of my article and of the link to my blog from FoP’s website. They also demanded the removal of articles by Stewart Littlewood and Gilad Atzmon who both have also been victims of such accusation.

In the monthly meeting of FoP that followed, this local anti-Zionist Jewish group expressed that they were “concerned that credence should not be given to contributors who are holocaust deniers or racist”.

Interestingly, this group who demanded the removal of an article by a Palestinian author and the link to a Palestinian website, simultaneously demanded that links to Jewish-Israeli campaigning groups should be added on FoP Website; “… links to Jewish campaigning groups like ICAHD, New Profile, Combatants for Peace and Jewish for Peace.”

Obviously, defamation, libel, smear and character assassination are used with the aim to filter information and to silence the debate. Such methods are terribly detrimental to the analysis and evaluation of the situation, hence it has the potential to limit and to dilute the efficiency of the Palestinian Solidarity movement. The outcome of such activities would primarily and effectively function as nothing less than Controlled Opposition.

What is worse, is the departure from even the most elementary rules of Justice and Human Rights. Indeed the methods used are reminding of either Banana Republics or Totalitarian Regimes. The accusation is based on lies, the accused has no right to defend him/herself (I was not present in the meeting due to illness, recording was refused, and the meeting was not adjourned) and sentence is pronounced on dubious basis (no reasonable quorum membership voting) and executed (website was effectively “epurated” of the article and links by the only Palestinian member of FoP) and this by virtue of the libellous say-so accusations.

It is almost inconceivable to me to imagine that in our time we would still -or again witness such methods, and this by people who claim to be “human rights activists”

Forbidden words , taboo topics, witch hunt, smear campaigns, excommunications, thought-policing and Book banning are no longer the trademark of fascists and right wing extremists, the profession has been shared now by “Jewish Anti-Zionist”, alleged “friends of Palestine”.

Did the age of enlightenment never occur?

Are we been thrust back to Medieval times, Inquisition period or stone age?

What is happening to our freedom of expression and freedom of thought?

And to whose benefit independent thinking has become a heresy?

What is shocking in this whole fiasco is the striking similarity of the method, the timing, and the type of accusation between the anti-Zionist Jewish “supporters” and hyper-Zionists. It is a carbon copy of the Anti Defamation League and the Board of Deputies of British Jews style that aims to “silence by slander” those who dare to speak the truth or go deeper in their analysis by looking at motivation and methods of operation of the criminal entity and it’s global supporters.

We are left watching in astonishment and disbelief some “anti-Zionists” doing the work for hyper-Zionists, the likes of ADL and BoDoBJ

It is worth mentioning that this sort of method is not new; some years ago, I witnessed the ostracising and excommunication of two activists, Paul Eisen and Gilad Atzmon, by my local group affiliated to Palestine Solidarity Campaign.

The fiasco was triggered by a paper written by Paul Eisen, which apparently hit some nerves; Paul Eisen and his paper were defended by Atzmon.

With my usual frankness I attempted to defend Atzmon and Eisen, explaining that in the writing of either men, I did not find any evidence supporting the allegations thrown against them i.e anti-Semitism or denial of the Holocaust. I defended their right to have their opinion expressed and heard. I also suggested that if the group nevertheless still has issues with the writing of the two men, they should simply invite them to an open debate and listen and allow others to hear from them directly. It was made obvious to me then that my views are naïve and reflect political inexperience. The “Thought Police” at the time decided that Nahida is in dire need of some “education”

A special meeting was organized to “educate” me – the Palestinian, about the Holocaust (since every other member in the group was already saturated with knowledge of it)

Consequently, the group voted to have nothing to do with (excommunicate) Paul Eisen, Gilad Atzmon and “Deir Yassin Remembered” organization, of which Paul Eisen was a co-founder.

It was an incredible experience to have witnessed mature, intelligent and dedicated human beings, been dictated to what to read and what not to read, and whom to have contact with and whom not. The audacity of such gagging and filtering of information should have raised suspicion.

Desiring to keep the unity of the group, I respected their decision and refrained from circulating articles by Atzmon for some years, even though I remained unconvinced and very discontent with their medieval method, attitude and of their decision. It clashed with my understanding of fundamental concepts of freedom and respect of the intellect of my fellow humans as well as my own. On a personal level, I continued reading and kept in touch with both Atzmon and Eisen.

In 2009, soon after the most recent Gaza massacres, by sheer coincidence I came across the word “Neshama” in one of the comments on ICH. Curious, as anyone would be, I googled the word, and lo and behold Pandora’s Box opened before my eyes; a new learning curve began; I learned about a group called Chabad Lubavitch. I was horrified to discover the supremacist ideology at the core of this group and the level of influence accomplished by the Rebbe and his followers.

Horror-struck, I started investigating, studying then writing about two main issues; the supremacist ideology and the high influence of this prominent organization, attempting to alert our Jewish allies to the danger of such ideology and influence… only to be faced with utter silence.

Two years later, the deafening silence was abruptly and dishonourably broken with the libellous letter of T.B and G.D in which they attempted to silence me once and for all by throwing the archetypal Zionist charge of “racism” and “anti-Semitism”

In their letter T. B and G. D have committed two main offences:

1) The first offence is personal, using the very same Zionist method of character assassination by sticking the “racist”, “anti-Semitic” label as a method of muffling truth. They attacked the messenger/ whistle blower who after two years of research and scrutiny of Jewish-Zionist materials, came to discover then to expose a supremacist ideology that animates many Jewish-Zionists in Palestine, and their collaborators.

T. B and G. D put words in my mouth, words NEVER spoken or written by myself. They proclaimed unfounded lies to suite and justify their accusation, they completely falsified and misrepresented my views:

Nahida … identifies the source of the problem as Jews and Judaism”…..

This to me is either total intellectual incompetence with severe incapacity to comprehend simple written English, which I doubt to be the case of T. B and G. D, OR it is nothing but blatant, calculated and malicious lie, and that sickens me to the bone, coming from alleged “friends” of Palestine.

Because I sensed that some Jewish members of the group had issues with my articles, I invited them at numerous occasions to openly discuss that troubling matter of Jewish Supremacist ideology and the high influence of its adherents. Apart from one person, NO ONE accepted the invitation. In fact G.D stated explicitly in the meeting that he was not interested in discussion, he pointed out that “his priority” was to deal with the allegedly racist material and not to open up a discussion with Nahida

Furthermore, during the monthly meeting T.B allegedly a “friend of Palestine” instead of expressing his support for the choice and will of the Palestinian people, he essentially expressed his support to the final materialization and the fulfillment of the main aims of Zionism; i.e the permanent presence of FOREIGN OCCUPIERS, in a land they occupied by military conquest. He exclaimed: “Nahida’s version of ‘one state’ would result in the expulsion of the vast majority of Jews which we should not support

Quotes from T.B and G.D’s letter:

But our key objections are that Nahida

a) misrepresents the situation in the US, where Zionism is far more powerful, and conflates it with the situation in Britain;

and b) identifies the source of the problem as Jews and Judaism” [Lie #1]

Nahida then slides from the US to Britain, as if Zionists here had the kind of hold over MPs which AIPAC has exercised in US politics. It’s not true.”

For Nahida, Zionism and Jews are always intertwined” [Lie #2]

We do not think that “all Jews” fit into any simple category. To claim they do is, in our opinion, racist” [ Lie #3]

The bulk of Nahida’s article is an attack against Jews, who are mentioned 44 times with copious links” [Lie #4]

End quote

In one single letter, T.B and G.D have managed to come up with FOUR LIES and clear falsifications of my views to justify their smear label.

One must ask, where is the intellectual integrity when critics resort to such heinous methods of falsification and utter misrepresentation as means of convincing their audience?

Moreover, I wonder how many times one is allowed to mention the words “Jews/ Jewish/ Jewish-Zionist” in an article. Is there a limit after which one can be classified as “anti-Semite”?
Is it 3, 17, 21… or what?

For the sake of argument, if say the limit was defined as 21, and if an article mentions it 21 times exactly, would the author qualify as a borderline anti-Semite?

Furthermore, does anyone wonder how many times the word “Jew” appears in T.B and G.D’s letter?

For the sake of verification, here are the real numbers compared to T.B and G.D’s letter:

…………………….Jew ………… Jews ………… Jewish ……….. Jewry ……….. Jewish-Zionist
T.B & G.D …………2 ……………..25 ……………… 33…………………3…………………….0

Nahida ……………0 …………… 17 ………………. 24 ……………….. 2 ………………….. 7

And what if (as seen above) the forbidden word and its derivatives are mentioned 63 times as it is the case of T.B and G.D’s libellous letter?

Can we claim that T.B and G.D’s are staunch anti-Semites for exceeding the permissible limit by far?

How fair, academic and rational is their conclusion using such bizarre logic?

I invite people to READ the article in question and verify for themselves if such an expose that explores the methods in which the Jewish-Zionist Networks organize themselves to form effective lobbies and pressure groups, should be banned.

The accusation of being “racist” or writing “racist”, “anti-Jewish” and “anti-Semitic” stuff is NOT a mere political disagreement, as T. B and G.D try to present it. Such accusation is unlawful, it is an illicit offence of defamation and slander that has the potential to ruin people’s most valuable, their honour and reputation and even their entire lives. It is designed to shun, excommunicate and ostracize people. These are precisely the infamous methods used by ADL to silence opposition. That’s why I am alarmed by such activity of unfounded libelous accusations, as they raise troublesome questions about their motives.

Those who resort to such accusations know fair well the dire implications and ramifications of such labelling. They know because they have done it before, the aim is to isolate, excommunicate and destroy the life of the accused; I witnessed how they shunned and almost destroyed Paul Eisen, and how they continue to campaign (though it’s not working) to destroy Gilad Atzmon.

If there is a need to verify through external evidence, for example, that their accusations against Gilad Atzmon are unfounded, it would suffice to enumerate the long list of international intellectuals who are gradually coming out in support of Gilad’s work (despite the ugly campaign of attempted gagging and slander led by UK campaigners). Amongst those intellectuals are many Jews for whom I have only high praise and have expressed much admiration. So much for my alleged “anti-Semitism”.

2) The second offence that I see in T. B and G. D’s letter is far more serious and its repercussions are far more reaching and far more harmful:

Their letter is a sinister attempt to block intellectual discussion, suppress Academic Freedom, obstruct rational and scholarly debate, filter vital information and smother serious research that examines three main identifiable problems:

Firstly; if we accept that Zionism is defined by the crime of genocide and ethnic cleansing of a nation and has caused the wiping out of a country, then investigating the motivation behind such crime is essential to fight it and hopefully to defeat it. Without unfiltered scrutiny, we would never know who are we dealing with and how to stop them.

Secondly; supremacism in Jewish ideology is not above criticism; like every other ideology, it should be transparent, accessible and not kept secretive. Without unfiltered scrutiny we would never know what animates Zionists to act with such aggravating cruelty and sadism.

Thirdly; to accuse of “anti-Semitism” and “racism” those who expose Jewish-Supremacism, is the equivalent of covering up the ideology behind the crime and dissuading people from learning about it, hence challenging and fighting this form of racism.

Dismissing such supremacist beliefs as irrelevant and obsolete would be a huge mistake because these views are the very motor that charges, motivates and energizes the Jewish settlers in Palestine, and gives them the sense of entitlement to do what they do without feeling any guilt or remorse.

For us Palestinians and for our supporters in the solidarity movement, it is a matter of extreme importance to inspect and scrutinize the ideology that motivates and animates the Jewish settlers in our occupied Palestine in order to better understand it, hence combat it. Restricting our understanding of the occupiers, their ideology and mindset cripples our ability to fight them back effectively and intelligently. Furthermore, in our day and age, racism has become outlawed, when people learn about the extent of the ideological racism in the Zionist entity, it will enable us to fight them in their weakest point, thus, bring the day of our Liberation closer.

Three Jewish-Zionist highly “non-influential” individuals “accidentally” bump into a Libyan “rebel”


Firstly; when we look at Zionism as a crime, again, then logically we must identify and investigate the modus operandi. Failure to do so would leave us unable to understand how our oppressors operate and succeed.

Secondly; with regards to the Jewish-Zionist lobby: investigative work that examines information, no matter how well concealed, and attempts to identify at least some of the culprits and the real criminals behind the fearmongering, the endless wars and the catastrophic conditions that our world suffers is neither racist nor anti Semitic.

Thirdly; devoid of proof or evidence for their false accusations, TB and GD’s insidiously filter information through intimidation and labeling anyone who dares to divulge vital facts. They disable FoP members from understanding the animus and the methods used to install and to perpetuate the criminal Zionist project, in particular the global network of collaborators who organize and effectively manipulate world policies by coercing world governments into continuous support of the Zionist project in spite of its growing inhumanity.

Expecting to become myself sooner or later a victim of such smear and filtering activity, I always make extensive scholarly links (T. B and G. D snarlingly call it “copious links”) to the primary sources I quote, mostly Jewish organizations. The network formed by these organizations involves large sections of Jewish communities worldwide, and its ultimate role is generally to support and vindicate the Zionist entity, by inserting themselves in influential positions.

Whether willingly or accidentally, GD and TB’s activity participates in a dynamic protection system (by peripheral concealment) of the global Zionist network.

Board of Deputies of British Jews celebrates the 60. anniversary of the Zionist entity

Usurping an authority they do NOT have over other members , T. B and G. D attempt to impose on FoP their restrictive dogma, i.e. that a majority of Jews worldwide, whether Zionist “diaspora” or “Israelis”, are not the manipulators of international policy with regards to “Israel”, but the complacent, docile instrument of American imperialism.

The logical implication of such nonsense, would be that Jewish Israelis, all of them serving at least 2 full years in the Israeli army (“the most moral army”) hence individually participating in Crimes against Humanity, were just naïve and innocent victims. Thereby, this nonsensical dogma exculpates the notoriously perverted cruelty and psychopathy of IDF’s crimes, up and down the command ladder. To persist, such dogma imperatively needs -again, to filter out glaring facts such as the over-representation of Jewish-Zionist dual citizens in vital areas of UK-US policy making, or the cross-pollination of racist and supremacist ideology between many Talmudic Rabbis and many Secular Jewish-Zionist Organizations supporting the Zionist project.

The persistence of this dogma requires also a strict and repressive censorship and gagging of whomever tries to scrutinize, analyze and discuss the facts, let alone expose them to an audience concerned by matters of equality and humanism, such as FoP and the Palestine Solidarity Movement in general was supposed to be. That is how and why smear campaigns with killer words such as “anti-Semitism” or “racism” are launched, in this instance it is against me.

At best, such activity on part of two alleged “friends of Palestine” is irresponsible. For my part I find reason to suspect worse.


Firstly; with regards to those who oppose the call for freedom to examine and re-examine history: Facts” do NOT need laws to enforce or defend them, what they require is research to examine their narrative and correct it for better accuracy and understanding. The denial of these principles will invariably lead to the eradication of the Science of History, and thus cause the blind repetition of more genocides, as we already see in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan… Much like what we see with the cover up and suppression of information about The Truth about 9/11, who benefited and how the event was used to create a climate of hatred and fear which enables the power elite to continue waging wars of aggression and extermination.

Secondly; without understanding of how the Holocaust has been used by Zionists, from its onset til this very day, we would continue to succumb to intimidation and give allowances that legitimizes and justify the existence of a criminal entity. By insisting on keeping an aura of holiness, uniqueness and exceptionality around the Holocaust which would continue to put it above any historical event, preventing researchers from examining how this event has been used, and how it enables our occupier to continue to use it as justification for what they do in Palestine.

The Holocaust ought to be studied as a historical event with a historical narrative that has NO sacred or exceptional dimension. The emotional, dogmatic and sacred luggage that has been attached to it has been systematically used and is still used by Zionists to justify and minimize their ongoing heinous Crimes in Palestine, as well as the claim of special status with special benefits in their respective countries.

Thirdly; there is absolutely no link -strictly none, between the so-called Holocaust and Palestinians. Nowhere can Palestinians be incriminated in the abhorrent oppression committed by central Europeans against Jews during World War 2.

I, as a Palestinian, am not prepared to live in guilt, nor to pay for crimes my people haven’t committed. We refuse to accept and will reject forcibly if necessary, pathologically violent and racist Jewish occupiers.

Military conquest, terrorism, robbery, torture, ethnic cleansing and slow genocide ongoing since the arrival of the first Zionists in Palestine almost one Century ago (i.e. before the Holocaust) does NOT make someone the rightful “owners” or “co-owners” of my Homeland, it makes them abject and violent occupiers.

I and with me my People are not accepting any more to keep having to listen to this narrative shoved down our throat with the repetition of tragedies about legendary love stories, human-fat soap or human-skin lamp shades in order that the Zionists continue to deceive, to trade with and reap the profit by deception and theft of a historical crime that has already been dealt with, and while they continue to use it to justify the ongoing theft of Palestine and extermination of Palestinians.

When someone claims to be in the solidarity movement with Palestine, but then at crucial time when the Palestinian struggle for Liberation gains momentum, to engage in such blatant cover up and concealment of vital information and analysis that would enable people to better understand the core problematic issues and how to effectively deal with them, I and with me every member of the FoP and the Palestine Solidarity movement, have the right to question the dubious intention and motivations of such acts, and to evaluate the damage such people are causing to the movement, hence to Palestinians.

I would like to add a few thoughts about the accusation of RACISM and ANTI-SEMITISM used as a method to muffle debate.

Anti-Semitism is nothing else but one form of RACISM. Jewish Supremacism is yet another form of racism. All forms of racism are vile and ought to be rejected.

Intimidating words such as “urgency” and “non-negotiability” were used to coerce the website manager to remove my articles and the link to my blog from the FoP group’s website. So here we are, a Muslim woman -herself victim of racism in the first place, and the only Palestinian in this local FoP group, finds herself Ethnically Cleansed by some self-claimed “Friends of Palestine” but whose actions hint to dubious motives.

An aggravating factor makes their motives appear to be even more dubious. Indeed the vocal lies and false accusations of me purportedly writing racist articles, is incompatible with their deafening silence about the mountain of evidence of the wide-spread existence of the ominously racist “Jewish supremacist ideologies“. In contrast to their attack on “my article’s racism”, this utter silence is a glaring attempt to deflect from the REAL racism about which I happen to have done extensive research during 2 years.

Also, I perceive their attack as an attempt to block intellectual debate about the problem of global Jewish-Zionist networking and lobbying, which to me is very dubious, -to say the least, when coming from self-claimed “Friends of Palestine”.

What I find really mind-boggling and hard to fathom in all this is the inconsistency with regards to RACISM.

On the one hand they do not hesitate to throw such felonious label against me and against many honourable activists, scholars and intellectuals. In fact they label as “racist” and “fools” anyone who exposes the revolting yet well concealed Jewish supremacism, anyone who notices the effect of Jewish-Zionists networking or objects to their disproportionate over-representation in key positions with all what it entails of conflict of interest and promotion of the interest of a foreign entity at the detriment of the interest of their national constituency.

Yet, on the other hand, mystifyingly the same people, who without hesitation accuse us of racism, stay utterly mute about the massive, revolting and offensive racism that fills thousands of pages in the Talmud, and in major Jewish religious books! And I am not talking about some fringe lunatic fundamentalists who use these always mutating texts as tools, what I am talking about is the inter-connective network of people deeply entrenched in the main centers of government, power and capital, and who are verifiably driving policies, war-mongering and hate-mongering!

This sharp contrast between the fervent reaction of those disloyal activists to my alleged “racism” on one hand, and on the other, their apathetic deflated reaction or lack thereof, to the sickening anti-human racism emanating from Jewish sources with its correlation with Zionists’ activities, leaves me speechless, beyond words.

Since I started exposing this racism, and over the past two years, I heard NOT ONE WORD about their outrage, opposition or willingness to expose or fight Jewish supremacist ideology, such as seen in the writing of one of the most respected, most reputable Jewish philosophers Moses Ben Maimon. also known as Maimonides.

“Maimonides’s Mishneh Torah is considered by traditionalist Jews even today as one of the chief authoritative codifications of Jewish law and ethics”. source
Moses Ben Maimon sees no problem with subjugating and enslaving gentiles

“They shall be your subjects and serve you

“The subjugation they must accept consists of being on a lower level, scorned and humble. They must never raise their heads against Israel, but must remain subjugated under their rule. They may never be appointed over a Jew in any matter whatsoever

He also talks about the right of the Jewish king to “ wage a milchemet hareshut, (war of aggression) i.e. a war fought with other nations in order to expand the borders of Israel or magnify its greatness and reputation“.

This “chief authoritative codifications of Jewish law and ethics” does not see any ethical predicament with “Jewish wars” of extermination and annihilation either.

Since this notorious ideology is the unequivocal underlying animus and root cause of the Zionist aggression and occupation, and since the “Facts on the Ground” prove the cross-pollination between this degradation and the secular Zionist aims, including the irrefutably slow-genocidal zionist military policies, scrutiny and criticism of this racist supremacist filth is not a matter of fringe theology, but a vital matter of totalitarian politics.

Now, where is their outrage against such blatant JEWISH RACISM And SUPREMACISM and terrifying nihilistic ideology?

Don’t they claim to be against racism wherever it comes from?

Why don’t they have the guts to condemn and campaign against such racism?

Is it not ludicrous to hear them condemn instead, those who expose and vehemently oppose racism???

Without using any commonsense they jump into the ADL bandwagon and rub shoulders with Zionists!

If someone obstinately objects to the massive control and unwelcome influence and the robbing of others rights and property, under the pretext of divine entitlement, does that person become the unreasonable “bigot” !

What kind of skewed logic is that?

This inconsistency in the views of my critics about racism is incomprehensible to me, especially in the light of long lasting years of friendship in which they have come to know Nahida closely, personally and intimately.

If they believe that I have suddenly morphed into a “racist” for whatever imagined reason in their heads, be it as they claim my experience as a Palestinian, or that I have been misguided, why didn’t they have the dignity to get in touch with me, as good caring friends do, be open and honest, have the integrity to stand up for what they claim to believe and discuss their views and objections against my writing with me directly?

Why choose instead to to stab in the back, using methods of defamation and slander?

Why feeling entitled to classify people and to dictate to people what should they read and what they should avoid?

Why this condescending attitude that appears to be claiming to know what is best for people and selecting their intellectual diet for them?

Why deprive people from the right to read a wide range of opinions including my own writing, and allow them to make up their analysis, and conclusions without manipulation, repression or restraint?

YES, in my writing I vehemently criticise RACIST JEWISH IDEOLOGY, but contrary to T. B and G. D’s claim I NEVER accuse ALL Jews of being racist, never put them -or anyone else for that matter, in one basket, EVER. To pretend the contrary is absurd.

In my writing I point out to verifiable international networks; but contrary to T. B and G. D’s accusation, I have never claimed that ALL Jews are part of these networks, and I never claimed to know the numbers in these networks, I merely point to the fact that the size, power and influence of these malevolent networks are enormously larger than those of our microscopic Jewish anti-Zionist groups. Just consider their lavish conferences, budgets and the astronomical amount of funds they raise and compare it with the national anti-Zionist groups, like for example our local group with stunted-growth with its mighty handful of seven members and a budget that one feels embarrassed to even mention.

In my writing I quoted the poll that 95% of USA Jewry support Israel as a Jewish state and 90% of British Jewry believe that Israel is the ‘ancestral homeland’ of the Jewish people , and concluded that MOST world Jewry are supportive of the theft of Palestine.

Would anyone in their right mind conclude from the above polls that only a minority of Jews in UK and USA are supportive of a Jewish state/ or a state for the Jews on STOLEN Palestinian land???
Never mind T. B and G. D’s pathetic claim that many Jews accept the 2 state solution or don’t support the expansion of existing settlements … It is of NO IMPORTANCE or consequence whatever percentage of them are “kind enough” to “share” the land with the Palestinians, what matters is that Palestine is NOT theirs to start with, yet the majority of them see no problem in claiming it for their people!

Truth is that the majority of world Jewry insist that Jews have a right and claim to the land!! including some of our Jewish anti-Zionist friends under whatever pretext. Their claims are NOT ACCEPTABLE and UNJUSTIFIABLE!

In my writing I point out to the influence of these organized networks, such information are available for any serious researcher, it can be easily verified, yes it is troublesome to find such a tiny group extremely overrepresented in so many vital areas of public affairs, such as finance, media, security and policy making, more so when the interests of such group are in conspicuous conflict with the interest of the larger group, and when this minority supports a genocidal entity that has not evolved in six decades.

Over-representation is as unfair as under-representation, and if anti-racists take it upon themselves to defend the rights of the under-represented minorities, it is of equal importance to do the same with over-representation.

Perhaps such question of over-representation might have not surfaced had the behaviour of those in question been shrouded with morality and humanity. Had they been working to establish social justice, building homes, schools and hospitals instead of destroying and polluting the planet for generations to come, and instead of law of the jungle where the super-rich eats the poor to the last bone, had they chosen cooperation instead never-ending conflicts, and promoted Peace and Justice instead of fomenting perpetual wars.

No one should be slandered for observing and objecting to such blatant mockery of morality, equality and justice.

In my writing I do not spend much time on referring to the Christian Zionists because their ideology is almost entirely sourced from the Old-Testament which is none other than the Jewish Torah! Most authentic Christians consider the Christian Zionists as worshipers of “Israel” and of the “Jewish people” rather than God, and in that sense they share the same ideology as Jewish-Zionists supremacists, in terms of their reverence and idolization of the Jewish people as the “Chosen”, they are one and the same. Furthermore, those who occupy my land, those who drove me out of my homeland, and those who are still depriving me from going home are exclusively Jewish Zionists.

In my writing I criticise the deafening silence of anti-Zionist Jews with regards to the racism that thrives amidst many Jewish communities. A silence which I believe will backfire one day, as they would be seen as not only complaisant but also complacent by deflecting away and concealing horrendous truths.

My criticism is motivated purely by my concern and genuine care for the good Jewish individuals that I have known and those whom I don’t know, because of what I perceive of the danger that would befall upon all of them if they continue to ignore the supremacist ideology, the growing influence of the adherents of this ideology and if they continue to ignore all the warning signs that points to accumulating bottled rage against such villainy, which no doubt would one day manifest itself violently as an inevitable backlash to much unsaid, yet felt, oppression and unspoken, but lived, subjugation.

I find it rather pathetic that the only defence mechanism that the accusers come up with is the smear, slander and the accusation of being a “racist” against anyone who pokes the boil exposing the pus infesting inside one of the most vile racist and supremacist ideologies thriving at the heart of some Jewish teachings as per Mishna Torah, Zohar, Tanya, and Talmud.

My critics plough though my writing, childishly counting how many times I used the word “Jewish”, ignoring the irrefutable evidence provided, and instead of challenging and refuting my arguments intellectually, they chose to “deal with me”, “privately”, behind my back with condescending sleaze and dishonesty by sticking a dirty label that they know fair well in their hearts that it does not belong to me, and they hope it would stick, hence they hope to scare people away from reading or being associated with me, using a method, yet again used by Zionists they pretend to condemn.

If indeed truth is what they are after, why don’t they come up in public and challenge my opinions with their “facts” and let people judge for themselves?

Whereby by refusing to do so, and by insisting in dismissing Jewish supremacy and Jewish-Zionist networks, they only promote the most cruel and degenerative racism to be found on the planet by means of concealment and shifting attention away from the real racism that I vehemently fight and deplore.

The persons who resort to accusation, suppression, character assassination and smear campaign very cunningly and dishonestly omit to mention that those who expose and condemn the racist concepts of “chosen-ness”, “exceptionality”, “superior morality”, “superior intelligence”, and “Jewish entitlement of world leadership” do not invent these concepts. It is not racist to expose or quote such abomination, it is not a crime to bring such Jewish-claims to the public awareness. Any honest criticism should be directed against those who believe such filth and make such revolting claims.

To those individuals who take part in such ADL style smear campaign of racism accusation, I say:

I accuse YOU of acting as a smoke screen to cover up REAL RACISM as manifested by JEWISH SUPREMACISTS.

I accuse YOU of acting as protectors and gatekeepers of the global Jewish Zionist Networks and Lobby groups by denying its existence and effectiveness.

I accuse YOU of complicity by insisting to conceal planned crimes against humanity as manifested in the supremacist nihilistic Chabad ideology.

Any Solidarity Movement with Palestine should take the opinions, the interests, and the future well being of PALESTINIANS at heart, otherwise, it speaks only for itself, NOT for Palestinians.

Palestinians have the right to fight for the FULL LIBERATION of their country, those who are willing to march with us ALL the way are welcome, those who are not, may look for another more convenient and less controversial campaigns to support.

I denounce any person or group who pretends to speak in my name as a Palestinian, yet behind closed doors, they plot and whisper on how to mute Palestinian voices and curtail the spread and impact of daring Palestinian opinions.

I denounce any person or group who claims to work for Palestine, yet their actions are contrary to the legitimate interest and aspirations of Palestinian people. Allowing themselves to be used as a vehicle to secure the future of the Jewish-Zionist invaders by facilitating the permanent takeover of Palestine with the pretext of “two peoples, one future” blather or “equal rights to both sides” nonsense.

I denounce any person or group who turns a blind eye and reacts with a deafening silence to the unimaginable repulsive racism that oozes out from some Jewish supremacists groups, yet instead, hysterically and shamelessly react to someone who accidentally came to discover such horrors.

Finally, I fully trust the Palestine Solidarity movement to have the intellectual integrity and capacity to see through the fog of manipulation, and to have the assertiveness, the respect to their own intellect and enough open-mindedness to look at many sources of information, and that they have the courage to READ for themselves and EVALUATE what they read INDEPENDENTLY, without having some gurus spoon-feeding them with filtered, processed, misrepresented or manipulated information.

Israel’s Manuscript Theft: Appropriating Jewish Arab History

Israel’s Manuscript Theft: Appropriating Jewish Arab History

A pigeon perches on stone tablets bearing the Ten Commandments in Hebrew on top of the Magen Abraham Synagogue, currently undergoing restoration, in downtown Beirut. Located in the former Jewish quarter of Wadi Abu Jamil, the synagogue was abandoned during Lebanon’s civil war. (Photo: AFP – Joseph Eid)
Published Monday, October 31, 2011
Ancient Jewish manuscripts have been stolen and smuggled from Arab countries including ones briefly displayed in Jerusalem earlier this month. The consistent Israeli practice is an attempt to undermine the existence of Jewish presence outside of Israel.

The ‘Damascus Crowns’ are Bible manuscripts between 700 to 1,000 years old originating from Damascus’s Jewish community. The manuscripts were smuggled to Israel and were stealthily displayed earlier this month for a few hours in Israel’s National Library in Jerusalem. This was the second time Israel claimed possession of the documents.

Syrian Jews were renowned for being ‘rich in books.’ The 11 manuscripts that form the ‘Damascus Crowns’ were guarded in some of Syria’s 24 synagogues. None were written in Syria, but arrived there with Jewish migration and held in the Jewish community’s libraries. In the 1970s, with the smuggling of Syrian Jews to Israel via Turkey, the manuscripts were quietly spirited away.These human and manuscript smuggling operations received financial backing from Israeli authorities.

Israel’s National Library displayed three volumes of the ‘Damascus Crowns’ for a few hours, the oldest of which dates to the 10th century. According to experts, it was written in Palestine. The manuscript demonstrates the influence of two rival schools of textual scholars, shedding light on the evolution of the Biblical text. It was purchased by David Sassoon and taken to Britain in 1914. The library purchased it in 1975 from Sassoon’s heirs.

The second most important manuscript displayed dates 700 years back. It is a masterpiece which can be politically manipulated as propaganda. The organizers of the exhibition say that the manuscript’s story resembles that of the Jews, because it traveled across the centuries from Italy to Spain. When the Jews were expelled from Spain the documents moved to Constantinople, then from Istanbul to Damascus with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. From there they moved to Toronto, Canada, and finally Jerusalem by way of the Canadian-Israeli agent Judy Feld Carr, who smuggled 3,000 Jews from Syria between 1970 and 1990.
Carr learned of the manuscript from Jews she smuggled out of Syria. She dispatched an agent in Damascus who hid the manuscript under his raincoat and smuggled it out to Canada. Carr then arranged the manuscript’s passage to Israel.

Eight manuscripts remained in Syria and in 1993, Israeli authorities decided to steal them. The Mossad conducted the operation and delivered the stolen manuscripts to Tel Aviv. The theft remains largely classified, preventing the manuscripts regular display in the national library.

Shlomo Baso, a rabbi born in Damascus who fled with his family in 1985, has a 300-year-old manuscript from Syria. “When the Syrian authorities allowed the Jews to leave, they (the Jews) dismantled the manuscripts into parchment segments, no bigger than a piece of paper, and distributed them among each other, concealing them in their luggage. When the pieces reached Israel, I sewed them back together and reconstituted the scrolls,” explained Baso in an interview with AP. Baso not only had a manuscript, but also a story for the media about the difficulty of preserving Jewish identity.
The Israeli press described the seizure of the manuscripts as an act of heroism, knowing full well that it is considered theft under international law. The UNESCO convention of 1979 prohibits illicit trafficking of cultural properties and decrees the return of all properties stolen after 1970 to their country of origin. Syria (which signed the convention) can claim back the stolen manuscripts.

But Israel doesn’t care for such conventions and seems bent on trying to erase any Jewish presence outside of Israel. When Israeli authorities failed to steal Hebrew manuscripts from the Iraqi House of Manuscripts, they waited until the fall of Baghdad before their specialized teams raided the archives as it was burning. The Hebrew manuscripts were ‘rescued’ and sent to Washington to be restored, it was claimed. Later on, the same manuscripts miraculously resurfaced in Israel, where they remain to this day.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

Was Liam Fox a Mossad Agent, a ‘Useful Idiot’ or Just another CFI member?


Monday, October 31, 2011 at 5:32AM AuthorGilad Atzmon

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: Once again, it is a Jewish media outlet that provides us with the ‘news’ the British press insists to hide. When it comes to Israel and its lobby, the British press is extremely ‘careful’ (on the verge of dishonest). But the truth seems to come out anyway. I guess that Liam Fox was ‘kicked’ out because he was advocating an action against Iran. Someone out there was clever enough to grasp that Britain better stay out of the next Israeli blunder.

British Scandal Linked to Pro-Israel Groups

Resignation of Defense Secretary Linked to Shadowy Pal’s Trips

By Kevin O’Sullivan


The scandal that led to the recent resignation of Britain’s high-powered defense minister has laid bare a seamy underside to the funding and influencing of politicians in the United Kingdom, and the donors of some of the country’s key pro-Israel groups appear to be near the center of the affair.

British Scandal: Defense Secretary Liam Fox resigned over ties to Adam Werritty.Liam Fox, who resigned his defense post October 14, has been forced to explain the nature of his relationship with Adam Werritty, a longtime personal friend, after it was revealed that Werritty had been traveling abroad while representing himself as an official emissary of the defense minister with Fox’s knowledge. Werritty’s travels included forays to Iran, where he reportedly met with opposition activists, and to Israel, where he is said to have met with Israeli intelligence agents, including the director of the Mossad.

With no official position, Werritty could not pay for his travels via the government. In fact, his travel was funded by a nongovernmental organization he established in which three of the six principal donors are linked to pro-Israel organizations.

Despite the revelations to date, Dermot Kehoe, director of public affairs and media for the Britain Israel Communications & Research Centre, or BICOM, a major pro-Israel public relations and lobbying group, said Jewish interest groups are unlikely to suffer lasting damage.
“It hasn’t been very helpful, but I wouldn’t overstate the importance of what happened,” Kehoe said. “Inevitably, any talk around pro-Israel lobbying tends to throw up a whiff of conspiracy which unfortunately helps reinforce the negative stereotypes [of the Jewish community].”

In the United States, the pro-Israel lobby is large and vocal, and wields considerable influence in the national body politic. It also operates fairly openly and has been subject to frequent scrutiny. But across the Atlantic, Jewish interest groups have traditionally operated far more quietly and have been subjected to much less examination.

The bright light now being shone on the Fox resignation may change that state of affairs. Fox officially quit his post because he allowed Werritty, his close friend, to pursue his own business interests at the heart of government without an official role. Werritty, who was also best man at Fox’s wedding, went into hiding amid lurid headlines about the exact nature of the relationship between the two men.
It was a clear breach of the ministerial code of conduct, and Fox, a Conservative Party right-winger who was once regarded as a leadership rival to Prime Minister David Cameron, had to go.

Now the focus has shifted to Pargav, the not-for-profit organization that Werritty set up to fund his travels on Fox’s behalf. Among its major donors is Mick Davis, chair of the board of trustees of the Jewish Leadership Council and chairman of the United Jewish Israel Appeal. Davis, 52, is also chief executive of the mining company Xstrata, listed in the top 100 companies on the London Stock Exchange, with a market value of about $65 billion.

The millionaire businessman has declined to go into detail about why he decided to donate money to Pargav. But he has also paid about $240,000 to the Conservative Party and $12,000 to Education Minister Michael Gove, another staunchly pro-Israel Cabinet minister.

The second donor, Chaim ‘Poju’ Zabludowicz, is a flamboyant ex-arms dealer who contributed slightly less than $5,000 through his investment firm, Tamares. The London-based billionaire, who counts Madonna as a close friend, is also a key figure in BICOM, which is regarded roughly as the trans-Atlantic equivalent of Washington’s American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
The third notable donor is financier Michael Lewis, a former BICOM deputy chairman who gave $47,000 to Pargav.

All three men — who are understood to be close friends — have since distanced themselves from Werritty. But the fact remains that their money helped fund, at least in part, some of his 18 trips abroad on Fox’s coattails since 2009. In total, Werritty was present at about 40 of Fox’s 70 recorded engagements, domestic or otherwise, while Fox was in office.

Another aspect of the affair focuses on Howard Leigh, who is the Conservative Party’s treasurer and is also vice president of the Jewish Leadership Council, a body with representatives from community and religious groups, including Davis.

In his role as Conservative Party treasurer, Leigh reportedly encouraged wealthy donors to fund Fox’s interests and office; in turn, Fox introduced them to Werritty.

The outcry over these donations has led to calls for a central registry of lobby groups, which the government is under mounting pressure to create. Kehoe said that his group, BICOM, would view any move toward such a registry as “perfectly reasonable.”

Mark Ramsdale, a prominent political strategy consultant, predicted that legislation to require such a registry would be passed during the current Parliament. He cited as a model regulations from the United States that require those lobbying Congress to register with that body. But he cautioned, “It’s one of the challenges for any government to define what a lobbyist is. For example, people can call themselves an advocate, counsel or consultant and can still operate outside the existing voluntary codes of conduct.”

Ramsdale said that statutes governing political contributions could be another area for reform. At the moment, political parties must declare donations of $12,000 or more and elected members must disclose anything they receive of $1,600 or more.

But there is no limit to the amount an individual or organization can donate or lend to a registered political party.

The focus in this case also includes Werritty’s use of the money. Virtually all the donors to Werritty’s cause have expressed surprise to learn that their cash helped fund Werritty’s apparent love of first-class air travel and upmarket hotels while on his forays. What is not clear is whether they were aware exactly how close Werritty was to Fox or how much influence, if any, Werritty wielded over policy.

Last February, Werritty arranged a dinner attended by Fox, Matthew Gould, who is Britain’s ambassador to Israel, and senior Israeli political figures at a security conference in Herzliya, Israel. Sanctions against Iran were reportedly discussed at the dinner. Crucially, it is understood that Israeli intelligence agents, including then-Mossad chief Meir Dagan, also attended the meeting.

Murkier still, Britain’s intelligence service, MI6, apparently warned Werritty that his multiple visits to Iran’s capital, Tehran, and contacts with Iranian dissident groups could be misconstrued, given his close ties to Fox, as suggesting official British support for an Iranian regime change. Foreign Secretary William Hague has taken pains to describe the notion that Werritty was running a parallel foreign policy as “fanciful.”

Before establishing Pargav, Werritty was CEO of the charity the Atlantic Bridge, which was founded by Fox to promote close relations between America and the U.K. The Atlantic Bridge was found last year to be operating with political purposes in violation of U.K. rules. The Charity Commission, the country’s regulatory body for charities, ordered it to cease its activities “immediately.” The Atlantic Bridge’s trustees closed the charity in July.

Senior City of London police officers are now deciding whether Werritty’s attempts to pass himself off as an “adviser” to Fox by handing out Westminster-style business cards could constitute fraud.
Meantime, Jewish communal leaders hope that the scandal won’t sully the reputation of pro-Israel groups. “At the moment there has been very little impact [on Jewish interests in the United Kingdom],” said Lee Scott, a Jewish member of Parliament from Ilford North, just outside London. “Normally there’s stuff put up on blogs, some of it quite nasty, but there’s been nothing I’ve seen so far. I think we need to wait a few more weeks to fully understand if there will be any effect.”
Contact Kevin O’Sullivan at feedback@forward.com

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

‘Assad has the upper hand!’


‘Assad lost the battle with foreign media but scored big with domestic public opinion’

    …. “We hope that our demands, as the Syrian opposition, become the demands of the Arab League and that the group then backs us up at the U.N.,” said Bassma Kodmani, a spokeswoman for the Syrian National Council, an opposition coalition. The council has called for an international mandate for civilian protection in Syria,……… ………. “We have to find out a way to stabilize Syria,” he said. “We have to find a way to satisfy the needs of the people. We hope there is a no military intervention.”….

    Mr. Assad, meanwhile, brushed off the international pressure and renewed his government’s warnings against foreign interference in Syria’s crisis. “Syria is the hub now in this region. It is the fault line, and if you play with the ground you will cause an earthquake,”….

    Syrian activists said they weren’t surprised with Mr. Assad’s characteristic confidence. 

    Protests have outstripped the government’s control in just a few instances in the uprising so far, including a month-long hiatus of military presence from the city of Hama in the summer that was later met with a renewed regime attack. Some analysts say government forces have been able to control—but not contain—protests, …. 

    “The government’s use of force is still capable of disrupting every move the street attempts to make,” said Louay Hussein, a writer and founding member of an opposition political movement, not affiliated with the Syrian National Council. “There are no clear solutions or decisive steps we can take.”

    At least 60 civilians have been killed in Syria since Friday, according to activist network the Local Coordination Committees, making it the deadliest weekend since May. Protesters appeared to retreat on Sunday, but still, activists reported eight antigovernment protesters were killed by security forces. 

    The weekend violence was concentrated in Homs, Syria’s third-largest city, and a larger province of the same name that has hosted a growing base of dissident soldiers fighting the army. On Saturday, 20 soldiers were killed and a further 53 injured in fighting between the army and “what is presumed to be defected soldiers,” according to the U.K.-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
    Syrians disagree on whether the incipient armed revolt in places like Homs is led largely by dissident soldiers or by civilians taking up arms.

    Mohammed Saleh, a resident of Homs, said tanks sprayed machine-gun fire at homes in a central neighborhood—including his own—throughout the weekend as troops fought what Mr. Saleh described as groups of armed civilians. The groups destroyed four military armored personnel carriers, he said. 

    I’ve never for a moment sided with this regime. But I won’t for a moment side with what is now called the opposition here,” said Mr. Saleh, a former political prisoner, who opposes using violence against the regime. “Homs has become like a foreign place inside the country—a city different than all of Syria.”…
    Last week, massive crowds gathered in several cities, including Damascus, to pledge their loyalty to Mr. Assad. Syria’s state television, broadcasting scenes of crowds chanting “The people want Bashar al-Assad,” said some two million people gathered at the capital’s Ummayad Square last Wednesday. It broadcast fresh scenes of a loyalist demonstration in the southern city of Suweida on Sunday.

    “At one point, what we call the silent majority came to be aligned with the street protests at least from a humanitarian and moral point of view. But now they’ve stepped back again,” Mr. Hussein said.

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Living Under Israel’s Boot

    by Stephen Lendman

    31 October 2011

    Like occupied people everywhere, Palestinians understand oppression better than experts. Ask them. They’ll explain.
    In Gaza, it means living under siege and Israeli air, land and sea attacks. West Bank communities face day and night incursions.
    In the week ending October 27, 58 were conducted, nearly 10 a day. Israel arrests Palestinians while releasing others. Every Palestinian wonders when their loved ones may be taken in middle of the night raids, including children young as ten.
    International law doesn’t restrain Israeli persecution. Peaceful protestors taste tear gas, rubber bullets, stun grenades, beatings and other abusive tactics to disperse them.
    On October 27, Israel bombed three Khan Younis locations in southern Gaza. No deaths or injuries were reported. Central Gaza’s Deir al-Balah was also struck, again with no casualties.
    Israel claims provocations each time. Gazans mostly respond in self-defense as international law allows. Israel calls it terrorism. It intercepted two Gazan fishermen, opened fire, detained them and impounded their boats.
    Attacks against other fishermen escalated. Boats were confiscated. Fishermen were detained. Tools and equipment were damaged or destroyed.
    Gazans are prevented from fishing in their own waters. Violent assaults can come any time. On October 27, Israeli warplanes destroyed a container used for fishing equipment and tools. Nets and a water tank were burnt.
    In 2011, 67 similar incidents occurred, involving live fire 40 times. Eight fishermen were wounded. Hospitalization was required to treat them.
    Other incidents involved threats and harassment, causing damage and confiscation of boats. Since 2000, Israel denied Gazans the right to fish freely in their own waters. In 2008, their territory was reduced from 20 to six nautical miles, but none of it is safe.
    Gazans fishing beyond three miles are attacked. Even close to shore risks interceptions, property damage and confiscation, and detentions. As a result, fishermen have lost 85% of their subsistence.
    In early October, West Bank Qusra village farmers discovered about 200 of their fruit trees vandalized. Extremist settlers were responsible. Israel doesn’t nothing to stop them. Similar incidents happen regularly.
    Despite repeated complaints by Qusra, Duma, Qaryut, Jalud, and other village residents, security forces violate their responsibility to protect them from settler attacks.
    In recent weeks, multiple incidents occurred. Property was vandalized. Confrontations between residents and settlers occurred. In one incident, soldiers killed Issam Badran for defending his rights.
    Elsewhere, a mosque was set ablaze after Hebrew graffiti was sprayed on it. In late September, multiple incidents destroyed over 900 trees. In 2011, 7,500 trees were vandalized. Perpetrators weren’t held accountable. Investigations result in whitewashes. Israel affords Arabs no rights, including its own citizens.
    On October 27, Aseel Ara’ra, age four, suffered quadriplegia after soldiers shot her in the neck. Surgery didn’t help. She remains in intensive care. She’ll never be the same again. Restitution never comes. Aggressors never say they’re sorry. They commit other crimes as bad.
    On October 26, Israeli police closed two NGO offices, claiming links to Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
    Jerusalem for Development head Khaled Zabarqa called his organization a “development institution” which closes social gaps in Arab East Jerusalem.
    Closures accompany rising tensions. Since 2006, they’ve increased since Israel began implementing the Jerusalem E1 plan to replace East Jerusalem Palestinians with Jewish settlers. As a result, political activity was prohibited. Legitimate protests are called crimes.
    On October 29, responding to Israeli air strikes, Gazans fired seven rockets at Ashdod, Gan Yavne, and west of Be’er Sheva in Israel.
    One or more Israelis were wounded, several others traumatized. Later a mortar struck near the Eshkol Regional Council. No casualties were reported.
    Israel always responds the same way. More air and ground attacks followed. Bogus reasons justified them. Nine Palestinians were killed. Nearly always, Gazans fire rockets only after Israel attacks. International law legitimizes self-defense.
    On October 28, hundreds of Palestinians clashed with Israeli security forces in multiple West Bank locations. Around Beit Omar, about 250 demonstrated and threw stones. Soldiers and police responded violently with tear gas, rubber bullets, stun grenades and other crowd dispersal measures.
    About 80 Palestinians protested near Nabi Saleh. Some threw stones. Similar incidents occurred around Bil’in, Kedum, Beitunia, and Lita. Israel responded violently.
    Throughout October, Israeli security forces disrupted villages and uprooted dozens of al-Walaja fruit trees to prepare land for Separation Wall construction. Palestinian land is stolen in the process.
    In July 2004, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled Wall construction illegal, ordered its removal, and compensation paid victims for damaged or destroyed property.
    On October 3, soldiers began uprooting trees in Ein al-Hadfa, Khallet al-Samak, Ein Jweiza, and al-Walaja area land. About 90 dunums were affected, as well as 230 olive, almond, cypress and oak trees. Grapevines were also destroyed.
    Other large sections were isolated, including an area cemetery. More Wall construction occurred around al-Ntouf and Ras Krimzan, east of al-Walaja village. When completed, it will be 2,000 meters long.
    Villagers petitioned Israel’s High Court to stop it. On August 23, they were rejected. The ruling stated:
    “(T)he route of the wall is necessary for the security of Israel and its citizens.”
    When begun, land theft, not security, was planned. When completed, about 12% of Palestinian land will be gone. Israel uses other ways to steal more land to secure all valued parts of Judea and Samaria it wants colonized and annexed.
    Since 2009, about 4,500 meters were built east, west, and northeast of al-Walaja. About 2,100 olive, grape, almond and other trees were destroyed. About 500 dunums of agricultural lands and forests were uprooted. Another 2,000 dunums in al-Walaja village were isolated behind the wall. It surrounds its north, east and western sides.
    From the south, an IDF security street encloses it. When sections under construction are completed, over half of village land will be isolated. Eventually, the Wall will completely isolate al-Walaja from other Palestinian villages and towns, service providing institutions, and vital Bethlehem governorate areas.
    Life under occupation is oppressive and cruel. Palestinians want it ended. They also want recognized sovereignty, full UN membership and peace. Israel denied them for 44 years.
    Nothing under consideration offers change. Palestinians are on their own like always, determined to overcome and live free. Their liberating struggle continues.
    Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
    Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Thank You Mr Dershowitz

    Back in March, notorious Zionist advocate Alan Dershowitz launched an attack on Norwegian universities that refused to provide him with a platform. Instead of learning the necessary lesson and amend his tactics, Dershowitz indulged himself in a personal assault against academics who opposed his visit to the country.

    To read more about the affair click here.

    Just a few days after the publication of Dershowitz’s rant, I was approached by some Norwegian academics and here is the outcome:
    Today at midday I will give a talk on ethics at the Trondheim University. In the evening I will discuss Jewish Identity Politics with the local Palestinian solidarity group.

    Tomorrow I will teach music at the University and in the evening I will give a concert together with the Orient House Ensemble.

    Thank you, Mr. Dershowitz!

    You can now order The Wandering Who on Amazon.com or Amazon.co.uk

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Red Scribblings: From Atzmon to Dreyfus-a reply to communalists and Stalinists

    Introduction by Gilad Atzmon:

    Red Scribblings, is a rare entity-he is a left thinker. He employs reasoning and systematic analytical methods. In the following article he exposes the level of deceitfulness employed by Tony Greenstein and his ilk. Reading Red Scribblings is certainly an interesting intellectual exercise.


    Tony Greenstein’s extended comment criticising my review of Gilad Atzmon’s new book The Wandering Who is indicative of a political method that can only lead to a ‘dialogue of the deaf’. It is a characteristic flaw of the fragmented far left that in political disputes someone is quoted out of context in such a way as to distort the meaning of their views, and a whole extended narrative is concocted to attack the falsified or caricatured version. This is not a good method, it not only actually leaves one’s interlocutor’s real views untouched, but it also makes the exchange impossible to follow to the uninitiated layperson.

    Such practices make the left a laughing stock. In this case, however, there is an additional element of communalism in that Atzmon is being ‘punished’ by left-wing members of his own Jewish community not merely for being right or wrong about something, but also for speaking ‘against’ his own people. The peculiar ferocity of the attack not only on Atzmon, but also on anyone who disagrees with these people’s most extreme characterisations, is shown by the contribution of another Jewish leftist, Evildoer, who baldly admits he does not seek a rational discussion at all with leftists who disagree with him about Atzmon.

    To read more:redscribblings.wordpress.com

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    NATO Ends the "most successful" Mission

    The mission shall continiue under another name.


    Like in Iraq, “Real Libyans”, sooner or later Libyans will realize, what they did to their country, however, the so-called “most successful” mission may encourage Nato, to attack Syria, especially with Syrian “nato brothers” and opposition in excile calling for “humanitarian intervention”,

    The term ‘foreign intervention’ is interpreted differently, depending on who you talk to in the opposition. It ranges from urging foreign powers to put pressure on the regime to demanding direct military action…..”

    “….What could start with simple steps under the banner of civilian protection in a sensitive country like Syria could turn quickly into assassination, partition, instability, hegemony and a redrawing of the map of the region.”

    So the scenario, We Came, We Saw, He Died without losing a single life shall not work.

    Meanwhile Al-Assad Warns of “Earthquake” if West Intervenes in Syria

    17 killed, including 4 US soldiers, in suicide bomb attack on NATO in Kabul

    NATO Ends Libya Mission
    Local Editor
    NATO was on Monday ending its mission in Libya, describing the campaign as one of its “most successful” yet.

    NATO on Friday announced the end of the mission, declaring that the 28-nation alliance had fulfilled its UN mandate to protect civilians from a brutal repression.
    “We have fully complied with the historic mandate of the United Nations to protect the people of Libya, to enforce the no-fly zone and the arms embargo,” NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a statement announcing the decision.

    “Operation Unified Protector is one of the most successful in NATO history. We are concluding it in a considered and controlled manner — because our military job is now done.”

    The no-fly zone and naval blockade, enforced by NATO since March 31, will end at 11:59 pm Libyan time (2159 GMT), as stipulated by a UN Security Council resolution last week that closed the mandate authorizing military action.

    The mission was terminated even though Libyan interim leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil had asked for the alliance to stay until the end of the year, arguing that Gaddafi loyalists still posed a threat.

    Gaddafi was killed on October 13 by a NATO raid that targeted his convoy in his hometown of Sirte, paving the way for National Transitional Council fighters to capture him and then kill him.

    Source: Agencies

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    A Great Jewish Joke..

    Harry and Esther are flying to Australia for a 3 week holiday to celebrate their 40th anniversary.

    Suddenly, over the public address system, the Captain announces,
    “Ladies and Gentlemen, I am afraid I have some very bad news. Our
    engines have ceased functioning and we will attempt an emergency
    landing. Luckily, I see an uncharted island below us and we should be able to land on the beach. However, the odds are that we may never be rescued and will have to live on the island for the rest of our lives.”

    Thanks to the skill of the flight crew, the plane lands safely on the island.

    An hour later Harry turns to his wife and asks, “Esther, did we pay our Kol Nidre charity pledge to the Synagogue yet?”

    “No, sweetheart,” she responds.
    Harry, still shaken from the crash landing then asks, “Esther, did we pay our United Jewish Israel Appeal pledge?”

    Oh, no! I’m sorry. I forgot to send the cheque, she says.

    “One last thing, Esther. Did you remember to send a cheque for the

    Jewish Care appeal this month?,” he asks.

    “Forgive me, Harry,” begged Esther. “I was so excited about our holiday that I didn’t send that one, either.”

    Harry grabs her and gives her the biggest hug and kiss in 40 years.

    Esther pulls away and asks him, ” So, why did you kiss me?”

    Harry answers, “They’ll find us.”

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    The Source of America’s Wars – Kristol Clear

    Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

    Kristol Clear: The Source of America’s Wars

    Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

    Americans feeling let down by Barack Obama’s escalation of the war in Afghanistan should take careful note of those who welcomed yet another “surge.” It might help them to identify the source of their seemingly endless wars.

    For instance, in a recent Washington Post opinion piece, William Kristol described Obama’s West Point speech as “encouraging.” It was “a good thing,” he said, that Obama was finally speaking as “a war president.”

    But if the comments on the Post website are anything to go by, few ordinary Americans take Kristol’s armchair warmongering seriously anymore. After all, as one poster quizzically asked, “A column by William Kristol the neocon that was wrong about everything from 2000-2008?”

    Although Kristol, like the rest of the neocons, “erred” about Iraq’s WMDs and Saddam’s links to Al Qaeda and 9/11, it would be a fatal error indeed to dismiss him as a fool.

    In order to understand what motivates Bill Kristol’s professed hyper-patriotism, with its consistently disastrous prescriptions, it’s worth recalling how his father, Irving Kristol, reacted to Vietnam War critic Senator George McGovern. The presidential contender’s proposed cut in U.S. military expenditure would, according to the “godfather” of neoconservatism, “drive a knife in the heart of Israel.”

    “Jews don’t like big military budgets,” the elder Kristol explained in a Jewish publication in 1973. “But it is now an interest of the Jews to have a large and powerful military establishment in the United States … American Jews who care about the survival of the state of Israel have to say, no, we don’t want to cut the military budget, it is important to keep that military budget big, so that we can defend Israel.”

    American Greatness

    Following his father’s advice, William Kristol has been a fervent supporter of massive U.S. military spending. In 1996, he co-authored with Robert Kagan an influential neocon manifesto titled “Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy.” It recommended that “America should pursue a vision of benevolent hegemony as bold as Reagan’s in the 1970s and wield its authority unabashedly.

    “The defense budget should be increased dramatically, citizens should be educated to appreciate the military’s vital work abroad, and moral clarity should direct a foreign policy that puts the heat on dictators and authoritarian regimes.”

    In response, another influential opinion-maker, Charles Krauthammer, hailed Kristol and Kagan as “the main proponents of what you might call the American greatness school.” It is hardly a coincidence, however, that all three advocates of “American greatness” care passionately about what Irving Kristol euphemistically referred to as “the survival of the state of Israel.” Or that many of those “dictators and authoritarian regimes” just happened to stand in the way of Israeli hegemony in the Middle East.

    The following year, Kristol and Kagan co-founded the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), a pressure group which sought to advance their “neo-Reaganite” vision. In the late 1990s, they did this mainly by writing letters to Bill Clinton, urging him to oust Saddam Hussein.

    In September 2000, PNAC published “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” in which they famously acknowledged that “the process of transformation … is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”

    One year later, they got their wished for “new Pearl Harbor” on September 11. The mass murder of almost 3,000 Americans was, as Benjamin Netanyahu indelicately put it, “very good” for Israel.

    Kristol’s War

    Immediately, Kristol’s Weekly Standard began linking Iraq to the attacks. Writing in The American Conservative, Scott McConnell explained the strategy: “Their rhetoric – which laid down a line from which the magazine would not waver over the next 18 months – was to link Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden in virtually every paragraph, to join them at the hip in the minds of readers.”

    The “Saddam must go” campaign, begun in a Kristol and Kagan editorial as far back as 1997, became so relentless that Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen dubbed it “Kristol’s War.”

    The Iraq War has, of course, also been called “Wolfowitz’s War.” But it could just as aptly have been named after Perle, Feith, Libby, Zelikow, Lieberman, or any of the other pro-Israeli insiders who took America to war by way of deception.

    In “Irving Kristol RIP,” Antiwar.com editor Justin Raimondo described Kristol’s legacy as “war, war, and yet more war, as far as the eye can see.”

    Unless Americans soon realize that they’ve been deceived by those for whom “American greatness” is merely a means to advance “the survival of the state of Israel,” that legacy promises to be an enduring one.

    Assad to Russia-1: ‘We are willing to cooperate with all opposition parties…’

    Via FLC

    ‘Recent Pro-Assad rally in Damascus’

    “… Bashar Assad also gave an interview to Russia’s Channel One in which he stated that Russia’s role is decisive in calming the conflict in Syria. He said that the Syrian authorities have been in touch with their Russian colleagues from the very start of the crisis and have kept them informed of every ongoing detail.In the interview he said that he is willing to cooperate with all opposition parties that have emerged during the seven-month uprising against his regime.
    But he also raised questions about the true nature of the forces that are fighting against his government.

    “…The information obtained during the latest interrogation of terrorists shows that there was arms smuggling to Syria from neighboring states,…The campaign was funded from abroad and we have a list of those who are responsible for this….” Assad said

    Assad expressed gratitude to Russia for using its veto in the UN Security Council at the start of October to block a harsh resolution on Syria and expressed hope that Moscow will continue to support the Syrian leadership.
    Russia has been supporting Damascus ever since the violence between armed opposition and Syrian law enforcement began in February. At the same time, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has insisted that if the Syrian leadership fails to sit down with the opposition at the negotiating table, it will have to go.
    In September, the Syrian opposition labeled Moscow an enemy and conducted a Day of Rage at various Russian embassies around the world. They also demanded Western powers establish a “no-fly zone” over Syria, similar to the one set up in Libya.
    However, dissident Syrian writer and democracy campaigner, Michel Kilo, thinks the majority of the population does not want a military solution to the crisis.
    “We are against military intervention whether today, tomorrow or in ten years’ time,” says Kilo. “We fight for freedom and we do not want to add external slavery to our domestic one. We do not want to become a part of the struggle between international and domestic forces. Syrians are peaceful. They want to progress under conditions of freedom and development and they do not want to be turned into a concentration camp, a polygon for larger countries,” Michel Kilo concludes.…”

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Israel, U.S. , want Abbas to be full-fledged traitor

    In his previous comments.

    • Mr. Amayereh thought “the Palestinian Authority (PA) decision to move against Muhammed Dahlan, the perpetual trouble-maker, will erase a major cause of the collision between Hamas and Fatah.”
    • Cosequentely he “thought that the Dayton era was well behind us.” and Abbas will be remembered as a a sincere man who tried but failed to make peace with Israel, even at a terrible price, namely giving up more than 78% of historical Palestine”.
    • Shocked with Abbas Disgraceful behavior, Mr. Amayereh, after de facto alliance” and “Mass axis”, invented another new term. He wrote: Israel, U.S. , want Abbas to be full-fledged traitor”

    Don’t blame Mr. Amayereh, living in WB he can’t call the traitor ( “He, presumably could lose his freedom if he did”), Traitor. May be he will do it in his next comment.

    In his below coment, you would learn new terms, such as, “genuine democratization”

    Democracy can’t bring freedom to prisoners. “The Palestinian people therefore need, first and foremost, freedom from the Nazi-like occupation before they can exercise democracy.” he clamed, ignoring (not forgetting) that Palestinians exercised democracy and elected Hamas and prevented, the so-called half-fledged traitor” from selling Jerusalem, and the right of return.

    After 477 Palestinians were freed in Gilad Shalit deal Zahar challenged Abbas to measure his popularity in elections.

    Yes “Hamas is here to stay” So far Hamas stayed Because it represents the true aspirations of most Palestinians for a better tomorrow ( Forgive Mr. Amayereh, he can’t say for full liberation, “He, presumably could lose his freedom if he did”)

    In case you missed it:

  • Real Islam in harmony with real democracy.
  • Biden prescription for winning wars without losing a single life. (Making new Bin Ladens) 
  • Israel, U.S. , want Abbas to be full-fledged traitor

    [ 28/10/2011 – 10:13 PM ]

    It seems that the tight Jewish stranglehold on the American government is not only preventing the Obama administration from pursuing a fair, rational and honest approach to the enduring Palestinian crisis, but is also inhibiting the formulation in Washington of an accurate and objective understanding of basic facts in and about the Middle East.

    An example of this willful and unnecessary ignorance was a statement made recently by the US Ambassador for Middle East Peace David Hale.

    According to Hale, the Arab Spring could “sweep Hamas from power.”

    “The Palestinians are no more immune to currents of change and demand for democratization, reform and freedom than any other people in the region,” he was quoted as saying.

    “I think you will see those same forces affect Hamas because clearly their leadership is not characterized by any of those words.”

    Hale’s words exude a lot of ignorance and misunderstanding of the facts and realities in the region.

    First of all, the Palestinian people have been languishing under a sinister Israeli military occupation for 44 years, and no amount of “democratization” in occupied Palestine will change this fundamental fact.

    The Palestinian people therefore need, first and foremost, freedom from the Nazi-like occupation before they can exercise democracy. Perhaps people like Hale can’t bring themselves to uttering the word occupation for fear of upsetting the Jewish lobby in Washington . He presumably could lose his job if he did, especially in a sensitive election year. Hence, the conceived phobic reaction.

    Like most Palestinians, I am not against genuine democratization in Palestine. However, let us be honest and have no illusion: Without ending the evil Israeli occupation, no amount of democratization would really help the Palestinians attain their freedoms. The absence of democracy in Palestine is due to the presence of the occupation. Twisting this fact would be an expression of dishonesty and mendacity.

    Does democracy practiced by inmates in a maximum-security jail bring freedom to prisoners? Yes, it might help them manage their daily life and routine inside the jail, but it won’t help them regain their freedom.

    Likewise, the Palestinian people are not merely striving to enhance their daily life, though this is a legitimate and important task, if only to help Palestinians withstand the systematic and institutionalized oppression meted out to them by Zio-Nazism.

    The Palestinian people want absolute and total freedom from the decades-old nefarious Israeli occupation.

    Besides, since when did the US really show any serious concern about democratization in occupied Palestine or elsewhere in the Arab-Muslim region?

    Didn’t the U.S. abruptly lose its composure and mental equanimity when Hamas won the Palestinian elections in 2006? Didn’t a U.S., under aggressive and frenzied Jewish pressure, acted rather spasmodically to strangle and throttle the Palestinians following the said elections which by the way the Bush administration itself had Okayed?

    I am afraid I have bad news for Mr. Hale and his equally ignorant boss or bosses in Washington. Hamas is here to stay. Hamas, which only last week forced Israel to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners from its dungeons and concentration camps, is strong and getting stronger:
    Strong because it represents the true aspirations of most Palestinians for a better tomorrow; and stronger because an arrogant Israel driven by Talmudic insolence only understands the language of force, stubbornness and strength.

    More to the point, a soft, obsequious approach toward Israel won’t take the Palestinians anywhere. It will only transform them into vanquished supplicants begging for their legitimate rights from an arrogant and rapacious Israel that is hell bent on stealing the remainder of Palestinian land.

    The truth of the matter regarding the impact of the Arab Spring on Hamas is that it has not only vindicated the liberation movement’s approach toward Israeli occupation, but it has also created an auspicious atmosphere conducive to helping Hamas and the Palestinians as a whole expedite their goals.

    The growing good chemistry between Hamas and Cairo is undoubtedly an auspicious development. The upcoming elections in Egypt, slated to start on 28 November, is expected to produce pleasant surprises if the nationalist and Islamist forces achieve victory in the polls and form the next Egyptian government.

    Israel and her guardian-ally, the U.S., (the latter is getting weaker and bankrupt by the hour) know that hundreds of millions of Arabs and Muslims expect the next government in Cairo to find a real correlation between the Egyptian commitment to uphold the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and Israeli treatment of and behavior toward the Palestinian cause and people. I bet this is going to be a serious matter for Israel’s firsters and the Zionist shipyard dogs in Washington who think Israel’s interests come even before American interests.

    In any case, the Islamists are simply coming, and Israel will soon become bereft of friends in this region, no matter what desperate feats Israel is trying. And Israel has only itself to blame.

    The Israeli state, itself a crime against humanity (perhaps people like Hale would shake in fear while reading this shocking but veracious phrase) never really lost an opportunity to alienate Arabs and Muslims. The murderous Israeli modus operandi toward the Palestinians and other peoples in the region has generated a huge reservoir of hatred toward the Jewish state. The Arab masses, whether in Egypt or Tunisia or even Libya, will not waste anytime venting their frozen rage and accumulative frustration vis-à-vis Israel when they are given the chance to do so.

    The King of Jordan Abdullah II recently “warned” that Egypt might effectively abrogate its peace treaty with Israel and that Jordan was effectively becoming the last remaining advocate of peace with the Jewish state? The king knew what he was talking about. However, his warnings are unlikely to be heeded, given Israel’s characteristic insolence and America ‘s brazen subservience to the evil entity and its backers in Washington .

    As to the whoring peace process, it is really difficult to talk about this process using dignified language. How else can one relate to a process that is based on lies, fraught with lies, and shaped by lies?

    Israel, which we earlier described as a crime against humanity because it is based on ethnic cleansing, genocide, and aggression, wants Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to become a full-fledged traitor.
    Israel wants him to kiss the paramount right of return for the refugees goodbye, wants him to forget East Jerusalem, and wants him to formally accept perpetual Israeli control over Palestinian borders, water resources as well as the settlements established by Israel on occupied Arab land since 1967.

    Needless to say, Abbas would rather commit suicide than agree to these irrational demands. He knows that any Palestinian leader agreeing to these capitulations will not live long to even regret his folly.

    Besides, how can Abbas possibly offer a “workable” alternative to Hamas’s seemingly more logical and appealing line, which is based on resistance and steadfastness?

    Will Israel, for the sake of Abbas’s legendary moderation, withdraw to the borders of the 4th of June, 1967? Will Israel terminate the building of colonies and Judaizing of Jerusalem? Will Israel allow for the repatriation of millions of refugees uprooted from their homes when the evil entity was established 63 years ago, which is a sine-qua-non for any genuine and durable peace deal in the region? Will Israel dismantle the settlements?

    The answer is a plain NO.

    Another question: Will the U.S. pressure Israel to end its decades-old occupation? The answer is also a plain NO because the Jewish lobby is in tight control of American politics and policies. Moreover, an American president, especially in an election year, won’t commit political suicide by displeasing the only state in the world that truly calls the shots in Washington.

    So Bahr hit the nail in saying Unity Is Abbas’ Only Option
    The so-called half-fledged traitor” faces three bitter options,

    Commit suicide as a “Full-Fledged traitor”
    Commit suicide as a “Half-Fledged hero”
    Or he would try to save his by dissolving the Palestinian Authority

    Another Question for Mr, Amayereh: Will the “Jewish lobby is in tight control of American politics and policies let the US intervine in Libya, and Syria?

    The answer is also a plain yes, “especially in an election year”, to please “the only state in the world that truly calls the shots in Washington.”

    In case you missed:

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Iraq War’s Lessons and War on Libya

    “The war in Iraq has meant the death of more than 4,400 U.S. troops and come at a cost of more than $700 billion.” CBSNews.com report
    In Libya case, “America spent $2 billion and didn’t lose a single life. This is more the prescription for how to deal with the world as we go forward than it has in the past.” Biden comparing the regime change unfolding in Libya with the Bush administration’s approach to Iraq.
    “Thanks” to Nato Brothers, “The real Libyans” and their International Friends
    In Case You Missed it:

    BTW, The amount Paid by the US during th 8 months war on Libya can hardly cover the expenses of two weeks in Iraq. 

    Now meet Jim W. Dean – The VT DEAN who have so many old Intel people here, (EX-CIA and there….who may have participated in old Gaddafi assassination Plots.) spotting shills, or at least the smell of them, is a finely hone occupational talent.”, introducing, Uri Aveney, the Old settler, whose career starts with the 40′s the terrorist organization, the Irgun, and ended according to Dean a true blue a peacenik as you can find on the planet”

    But the “Salomnik” worried because “Obama on the wrong side of history, Uri is not?” worried  because Egypt will change his lives
    The Salomnick who imagined “posters condemning Binyamin al-Assad and Bashar Netanyahu.” should rejoice the death of Gaddafi, most likey because Gaddafi called for ISRATINE

    Iraq War’s Lessons Lost on US
    by , October 29, 2011
     In a White House Statement on Oct. 21, U.S. President Barack Obama pledged that his country would finally withdraw forces from Iraq. “After nearly nine years, America’s war in Iraq will be over,” he said.
    Providing some context to Obama’s announcement, a published on the same day stated, “The war in Iraq has meant the death of more than 4,400 U.S. troops and come at a cost of more than $700 billion.”

    The U.S. media is now failing to process any facts aside from the losses suffered by the United States, which wrought war and destruction on a country in urgent need of peace and humanitarian assistance. For over a decade prior to the war, Iraq was reeling under U.S.-led U.N. sanctions, which left the country’s infrastructure in a state of near collapse.

    In her introduction to former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark’s important book, “The Impact of Sanctions on Iraq: The Children Are Dying,” Sara Flounders wrote, “Sanctions are a weapon of mass destruction. Since sanctions were imposed on Iraq, half a million children under the age of five have died of malnutrition and preventable diseases. Sanctions impose artificial famine. A third of Iraq’s surviving children today have stunted growth and nutritional deficiencies that will deform their shortened lives.”

    In 1999, I was one of those who directly witnessed the impact of the sanctions on Iraqi children. I came back from the country with heaps of photos and memories that haunt me to this day. Oddly enough, it was not sanctions as “a weapon of mass destruction” that inspired action to end the siege, but alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that invited another disaster to an already devastated nation.
    It might take us years to truly understand the magnitude of what has since transpired in Iraq. Death and destruction have hovered over the country, killing and wounding hundreds of thousands, sending millions into exile and millions more have been classified by U.N. agencies as Internally Displaced Persons (IDP). It was a horror show that cannot be captured with the language of reason, but every moment of it was experienced by millions of ordinary people, punished severely for a crime they never committed.

    The last U.S. forces will depart the country by Jan. 1 “with their heads held high, proud of their success,” according to Obama. This is the very president who, in a speech in Cairo on June 4, 2009, stated that “unlike Afghanistan, Iraq was a war of choice.” What is there to be proud of in a devastating war of choice, Mr. President?

    Before the U.S. House of Representatives on Jan. 18, 2007, Texas Congressman Ron Paul — presently running for the Republican presidential nomination — fittingly remarked, “Cliches about supporting the troops are designed to distract us from failed policies, policies promoted by powerful special interests that benefit from war. Anything to steer the discussion away from the real reasons (for) the war in Iraq will not end anytime soon.”

    But it is ending, simply because it was militarily unwinnable, financially unsustainable and politically indefensible. “Supporting the troops,” however, will continue to serve as an escape route for those who still refuse to discuss the Iraq war from a moral and legal viewpoint. For them, it is essential that the cover-up persists, so as not to deny the U.S. the opportunity to instigate other wars of choice whenever suitable.
    In a press briefing shortly following Obama’s end-of-war announcement, Antony Blinken, national security advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, remarked on whether the war was worth it. He answered, “history is going to have to judge.”

    But Iraqis don’t need to wait for U.S. history books to demonstrate to them the depth of their tragedy. The Lancet survey had already determined that between March 2003 and June 2006, 601,027 Iraqis died violent deaths. Opinion Research Business survey said that 1,033,000 died as a result of the conflict from March 2003 to August 2007. In one single revelation, WikiLeaks stated that “its release of nearly 400,000 classified U.S. files on the Iraq war showed 15,000 more Iraqi civilians died than previously thought.”

    Equally important is the fact that the violent mentality that insists on war — as opposed to diplomacy — to further U.S. interests is still deeply rooted among U.S. elites. Reporting from Washington, Jim Lobe recently wrote, “Key neoconservatives and other rightwing hawks who championed the 2003 United States invasion of Iraq are calling for military strikes against Iran in retaliation for its purported murder-for-hire plot against the Saudi ambassador here.”

    Blogging for Foreign Policy website on Oct. 21, Dalia Dassa Kaye wrote, “The martial rhetoric from inveterate hawks was predictable. But even President Obama suggested that the United States would not take any ‘options off the table,’ a phrase that is understood to leave open military options.”
    The rhetoric buildup for another conflict received a big boost during Leon Panetta’s first visit to Iraq as U.S. defense secretary on July 1. He said then that his country “will act ‘unilaterally’ to confront what he said were Iranian threats to U.S. interests in Iraq.” The U.S. was “very concerned about Iran and the weapons they are providing to extremists here in Iraq,” he said.

    It will not be easy to reconcile Panetta’s comments with Obama’s end-of-war announcement, which states that “Iraqis have taken full responsibility for their country’s security” and that the relationship between the U.S. and Iraq will be that “between sovereign nations, an equal partnership based on mutual interest and mutual respect.”

    There are no signs of the neoconservatives altering their views. The appetite for conflict also seems well and alive among Washington’s influential elites, who still brazenly propagate that the U.S. war brought good to Iraqi society, despite all evidence to the contrary.

    The official website for the U.S. Forces in Iraq, USF-Iraq.com, is adorned by the following statement under the banner, The New Face of Iraq: “The nation of Iraq has undergone sweeping political, economical and social changes since the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime. Elected officials are now in power, overseeing the continued development of security, infrastructure, education, security and finance.”

    With that apparent “success” in mind, the neocons can always advocate another military intervention or full scale invasion, whenever possible and affordable.
    “The tide of war is receding,” said Obama. One has serious doubts.

    Israel violates Egypt-brokered truce, escalates aerial attacks on Gaza

    Israel violates Egypt-brokered truce

    [ 30/10/2011 – 10:18 AM ]
    GAZA, (PIC)– Israel has escalated its military aggression against the Gaza Strip and intensified its air raids at dawn Sunday immediately after a truce brokered by Egypt was declared between the two sides.
    A spokesman for medical services in Gaza told the Palestinian information center (PIC) reporter there that Israel waged from one o’clock to three thirty in the morning more than 10 air strikes on different targets in Gaza especially in Khan Younis and Rafah areas..
    The air raids caused extreme horror and panic among civilians especially the children and material damage in the bombed areas, the spokesman added.
    Egypt was reported to have managed to broker a truce, supposed to start at three o’clock at dawn, between the Palestinian resistance factions in Gaza and the Israeli occupation state, but the latter waged a series of air raids after this time violating the cease-fire.
    A Palestinian informed source told the PIC that efforts made by the Egyptian intelligence service was able to convince the resistance factions in Gaza especially the Islamic Jihad Movement to accept a reciprocal cease-fire with the Israeli occupation starting today at three o’clock in the morning.

    Egypt Brokers Truce between Islamic Jihad and Israel
    Local Editor
    Egypt has succeeded Sunday in brokering truce between the Islamic Jihad and Israel after a day of violence that killed nine Palestinians and one Israeli.

    The ceasefire came into effect shortly after dawn, Sunday, after a day of violence that was ignited by an Israeli air strike that hit Rafah in South Gaza Saturday killing five Islamic Jihad activists.

    The strike was later followed by a number of strikes that killed four other Palestinians.

    The Islamic Jihad responded to the Israeli strikes by firing rockets at Ashdod, Gan Yavne, and Ashkelon killing one Israeli and injuring four others.

    The Israeli police said 31 rockets were fired at Israel since Saturday’s initial Israeli air strike.

    AFP quoted sources it reported were close to Hamas movement as saying that the Egyptian intelligence had managed to broker a ceasefire effective early Sunday morning.

    “The efforts and intensive contacts led by senior Egyptian intelligence officials led to a national consensus to restore calm,” the sources told AFP, adding that “the Islamic Jihad is committed to the truce as long as the occupation commits to it.”

    Source: Websites

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Foreign Intervention: Debating the Taboo of the Syrian Opposition

    Haitham al-Maleh (L), president of the Syrian National Salvation Congress and Abdul Razak Eid (R), president for the national council of Damascus declaration abroad during a press conference on 10 October 2011 at the CAPE, a foreign press center in Paris. (Photo: AFP – Michel Gangne)
    Published Saturday, October 29, 2011
    Paris – In Syria, the mere mention of foreign intervention is enough to divide the opposition into warring camps. This is at least how things appear on the surface. Close examination of the Syrian opposition parties’ positions, however, reveals that there is not that much difference between them.
    The term ‘foreign intervention’ is interpreted differently, depending on who you talk to in the opposition. It ranges from urging foreign powers to put pressure on the regime to demanding direct military action. But the significance of such distinctions is lost on some prominent opposition figures in Paris, such as Haytham Manna, a leading member of the National Coordination Committee (NCC). He insists that anyone who mentions foreign intervention is a traitor, and that includes members of the Syrian National Council (SNC).
    Perhaps the Libyan precedent, which started out as a UN resolution calling for “intervention to protect civilians” and ended with NATO bombardment of Libyan cities, is an obstacle to serious debate. While some in the opposition have come to the conclusion that there is no way of bringing about the fall of the Syrian regime without foreign assistance, others fear that the mere mention of international support is a breach of Syrian sovereignty and a prelude to the bombardment of Syria, and perhaps its occupation.
    The opposition in Syria that is recognized by the regime is dismissed as mere window dressing by the opposition in Paris. One of them is Qadri Jamil, the secretary-general of the National Committee for Unity of Syrian Communists. For him, any mention of protecting civilians by a foreign force will necessarily lead to the occupation of Syria. According to Jamil, the SNC is unpatriotic because “it demands military intervention to protect civilians.” This is a position that is also shared by ‘unrecognized’ opposition members such as Haytham Manna. This is the extreme side of those who refuse to even mention any external solutions for the Syrian problem.
    There is also the opposite extreme camp, represented by prominent opposition members such as Haitham al-Maleh, or some obscure ones such as the journalist Fahd al-Masri, who used to work for media organizations owned by the ex-vice president, Rifaat Assad. For them, military intervention is not just a possibility, it is practically a demand. They believe that the Syrian regime will not fall without it and that Syrian lives cannot be protected in any other way. So while al-Masri, who lives in Paris, insists that unconditional military intervention should take place, al-Maleh, who comes from an Islamist background, describes his position as part of a simple mathematical equation, stating that foreign military intervention against the regime remains, despite all its problems, better than the survival of the Assad regime. Al-Maleh says that this is particularly true because the air strikes associated with this intervention “will not hit civilians, they will target the regime institutions,” and therefore “destroying stones is better than killing people,” (as the regime does).
    Between these two camps, some prominent opposition members, including members of the National Council and the National Coordination Committee, believe that the debate on the possibility of a military intervention is essentially being carried out in the wrong way. For example, the veteran opposition member Michel Kilo believes that the Syrian people cannot agree to any military intervention or to an occupation of their country, and therefore the issue is not even a possibility. Alternately, leaders of the National Council, such as Dr. Burhan Ghalioun and Dr. Bassma Kodmani, believe that forces of foreign intervention, be it the West in general or Turkey, or both, are not prepared to carry out a war or to pay its bills. They therefore believe that discussion of this issue distracts the debate and serves as a chimera that benefits the regime’s survival and facilitates its accusations of treason against millions of adversaries. This is why their official position, at least that of the National Council, insists that peaceful foreign intervention in Syria should serve a specific and limited end. That end is to strengthen the pressure of the country’s widening protest movements on the regime and cause massive divisions in the political and military apparatus which would lead to the regime’s downfall.
    Kilo reminds us that the Syrian opposition warned the regime at the beginning of this crisis that the use of violence to solve a political problem would “open the door to foreign intervention. The same goes for sending the army to the Turkish, Lebanese, Iraqi, and Jordanian borders because this will necessarily cause the intervention of these countries.” Kilo adds, “Today, there is no one who is not interfering in Syrian affairs, including Hezbollah, Iran, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, America, China, Russia, even the Phalangists (being ironic) and the Islamists in Tripoli. Syria no longer has any sovereignty. If the regime carries on with its current policies, then the crisis will lead to yet more foreign intervention.” Kilo thinks, “The regime never enjoyed internal legitimacy, it has always relied on external legitimacies to survive. When it lost this external legitimacy, it did not seek to foster other internal ones. In fact, it tried and is still trying to look for a new foreign cover. Therefore, what we need is Arab help to protect us and not foreign intervention.”
    Fayez Sara agrees with his colleague Kilo. He insists that the only unacceptable form of foreign intervention is military. This notion can be considered as a joining of the dots with the opposition from the National Council, whose position is summarized by Ghalioun, when he says that the Council is confident that foreign pressure, in the form of positions, statements, sanctions, Arab and international observers and foreign media, is essential for protecting civilians and not to the overthrow of the regime, because this task is the responsibility of Syrians themselves.
    But it is well known that the rejection of any military intervention by the officials in the National Council is not agreed upon by all its members. This exposes internal differences of this opposition body, who only agree on the need to overthrow the regime. One of the main sides in the Council, the Muslim Brotherhood, has a completely different discourse than Ghalioun and Kodmani, for example. This is why members of the council, such as Farouk Taifour, Najib al-Ghadban and their secretary-general, Muhammad Riyad al-Shaqfa, have no qualms about taking positions that are contradictory to those announced by the official spokespeople of the Council. They have proclaimed that military intervention is imminent and that Turkey will play a role in it, particularly in enforcing the no-fly zone on Syrian military jets and imposing an arms-free zone. Perhaps they hope to create a Syrian Benghazi to act as a launching pad for the regime’s overthrow.
    Because the concept of international protection and its implementation is a delicate and sensitive matter, members of the SNC are working hard to find a new interpretation that will prevent the regime from continuing its repression, on the one hand, and avoid military intervention on the Libyan scale, on the other, according to Kodmani. The spokeswoman for the Council says that “faced with these complications, we have to find other means of support and foreign protection which are different from the Libyan experience… The situation is difficult because the principle of protecting civilians was implemented in Libya for the first time in history. But we have to invent other ways of implementing it in Syria by looking at historical precedents other than military intervention in the Libyan example. This could be in the form of protected areas or humanitarian corridors, where there is no room for the military element…”
    Parties allied to the council, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, have publicly called for military intervention. The council spokeswoman thinks this is because the Brotherhood wants to “be in tune with feelings on the street which call for military intervention.” She realizes that the SNC wants a conciliatory solution to this issue. “We know that the street wants military intervention, which we and the international community reject.”
    Kodmani’s assertion that uprising Syrians want military intervention to rid them of Assad and are pressuring the council to act opens up new contradictions. In Paris, they say that the people who are protesting in the streets know the situation on the ground better. They have decided what they want and they understand that the regime cannot be overthrown without military intervention. This is a hypothesis that is confirmed by one Paris activist now exiled for decades. They even go as far as insisting that “the reason for establishing the National Council was just to find a party to demand foreign intervention and international protection.” The same activist says that people in Syria want military intervention, but he thinks that talking about military intervention is just a threat, “because when the regime feels that the world wants to intervene, it will fall.”
    But if it is true that Syrian protesters want military intervention, there is a big dilemma for opposition parties. If they do not call for this intervention, then they do not reflect the demands or the spirit of the Syrian revolution. But if the opposition calls for military intervention publicly, whether they call it international protection or civilian protection, they will appear to a large sector of Syrians and non-Syrians as if they are urging the destruction of their country and even its occupation, as everyone agrees that the ‘international community’ is just a cover for Western interests. What could start with simple steps under the banner of civilian protection in a sensitive country like Syria could turn quickly into assassination, partition, instability, hegemony and a redrawing of the map of the region.
    This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    ‘Turkey is Playing with Fire!’

    Via FLC

    “The emergence under Turkish protection of the Free Syrian Army raises again the question of whether the protesters against President Bashar al Assad should turn to violence. 

    Turkey has welcomed Syrian refugees for months. There is certainly nothing wrong with that: it is in fact an obligation (non-refoulement) to do so if the Syrians have a well-founded fear of persecution, which under the circumstances is evident. Disappointed in Bashar’s refusal to listen to their advice or respond to pressure in favor of reform, the Turks have not however yet done much to block investment in Syria or otherwise signal their displeasure with more than words. Now, rather suddenly, a Foreign Ministry official appears with a Syrian colonel who announces to the world that the Free Syrian Army has already attacked Assad’s forces inside Syria and needs better weapons in order to continue the effort.
    This looks to me like a puzzle with missing pieces. Have the Syrians been allowing Kurds to attack inside Turkey? I can’t find indication of that in the press, but it would not be surprising, and might well prompt a response in kind. Or are the Turks just using the means at their disposal? Will Syria also respond in kind, raiding Syrian refugee camps across the border inside Turkey? Or, if they haven’t already, allowing Kurds to attack Turkish forces?

    Whatever is going on, it is dangerous. The protesters’ umbrella group, the Syrian National Council, has so far opted not to use violence. The emergence of a separate group prepared to do so from outside the country puts peaceful protesters at even greater risk than they have been so far, and hurts the prospects for maintaining their unity. 

    The Americans have appeared to be urging the protesters to stick with nonviolence, knowing full well that third party armed intervention like that in Libya is not in the cards. The Turks are of course capable of their own initiatives, but I can’t help but wonder whether Washington has been in touch with Ankara about the Free Syrian Army. Did the Americans oppose letting it raid inside Syria from Turkey, or did they turn a blind eye? 

    Whatever, as my kids say. None of this is good. Violence–however justified on moral grounds–is going to make it harder for the protesters to win over minorities in Syria and opens the real possibility of ethnic and sectarian warfare that will spill over Syria’s borders into Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Lebanon. That could become a truly serious mess that all concerned would regret. It is time to ask the Turks to keep the Free Syrian Army inside Turkey and to stop playing with fire. If they want to do something, some stiff restrictions on Turkish business with Syria would help.”

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    “If we lose Egypt, we effectively lose the Arab Spring.”

    Via FLC

    The euphoria over the end of the Gadhafi regime has been amplified by satisfaction at the outcome of the Tunisian elections. US officials now see more opportunity to press for reform in Syria and Yemen. However, as before, Egypt remains the focus of concern with analysts worried that vested anti-reform interests will set back democratic institution-building there. As one NSC official commented privately to us: “If we lose Egypt, we effectively lose the Arab Spring.” Of concurrent interest is Secretary of Defense Panetta’s continuing trip to Asia. There is little doubt that a “pivot” in US foreign policy is taking place in favor of the Pacific. Though long-anticipated by commentators on international relations, this shift is now becoming manifest.  

    There are three drivers:  

    1) the perception of a permanent rise of the Asian economies. In a comment on the Eurozone negotiations to end the crisis there, one Treasury official said to us: “You see, the Europeans have to beg the Chinese to solve their problems for them. That is where the money will be in the 21st century”.  

    2) The rising sense of threat perception from Asia, particularly in the cyber arena. One top Pentagon leader told us: “we are militarily dependent on our network of satellite and underwater cables. They are at their most vulnerable in Asia.”  

    3) The need to respond to diminishing defense appropriations by trimming strategic engagement outside Asia. Pentagon officials are quick to reassure concerned Europeans that the US is not turning its back on NATO.  

    However, as the Libya operation demonstrated, the US will in the future not necessarily take a full leadership role if it deems that its strategic interests are not at stake. Similarly, the decision not to insist that Iraq permits continued US basing after the end of this year reflects a wish to avoid expensive over-commitment. For this reason, we expect that the timetable to withdraw from Afghanistan by 2014 will be adhered to, despite the recent upsurge in violence there. Finally, the top priority facing Washington policy makers over the coming weeks will be the budget. The Congressional ‘super committee’ is due to report by Thanksgiving, but signs are multiplying that it will be deadlocked. Another period of financial uncertainty may like ahead.

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Female suicide bomber strikes in vicinity of ruling AK Party in Turkey

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Remembering The 55th Anniversary Of The Israeli Massacre In Kafr Qasim – Oct 29, 1956

    A Million Stories about the Zionist Rape of This World – in pictures

    29.10.10 – 14:38 | PNN News Network (Updated 29.20.2011)
    Ghassan Bannoura– PNN – On the evening of October 29, 1956 Israeli troops shot and killed 49 unarmed Palestinian civilians in the village of Kafr Qasem, 20 km east of Tel Aviv near the green line.


    The Israeli Massacre In Kafr Qasim

    Now the village has a population of 18,100 Palestinians, some of whom marched today alongside neighboring Arab villages to commemorate those killed 1956. People marched from the village center to the memorial site and placed candles for those killed; village leaders made speeches in commemmoration.
    From 1949 till late 1966 the Israeli government decided to consider all its Palestinians citizens a “hostile population “. All major Arab population centers were governed by military administrations and divided into four districts.
    Seven Arab villages, including Kafr Qasim, all along the green line, were considered as high infiltration threat. The villages were patrolled regularly by border police (Magav) under the command of Israeli army brigade commander Colonel Issachar Shadmi. Those villages, containing some 40, 000 villagers, were called the Central District.
    October 29, 1956
    On the day of the massacre, the Israeli army decided to place all seven villages along the green line under a curfew called the War Time Curfew, from 5 in the evening until 6 the following morning. Israeli soldiers were instructed to shoot and kill any villager violating the curfew.
    Even though the border police troops were given the order by their commander at 3:30 in the afternoon, they only informed the mayor of Kafr Qasim about an hour later, leaving a window of 30 minutes for the 400 villagers working in the fields or outside the village to come back home.
    According to Israeli investigation committee records, from 5:00 pm until 6:30 on October 29, 1956, border police shot and killed 49 villagers from Kafr Qasim as they tried to return home. Among those killed were 23 children and one pregnant woman.
    The killed and injured were left unattended through the night. After the curfew ended, villagers took the injured to hospitals and laid the dead to rest in a mass grave.
    In his testimony during the investigation, the survivor Jamal Farij said that soldiers shot villagers without any warning. He was driving back to his village along with 28 passengers in a truck.
    ‘We talked to them. We asked if they wanted our identity cards. They didn’t. Suddenly one of them said, ‘Cut them down’ – and they opened fire on us like a flood.’
    Legal Action


    Kafr Qasim Massacre Memorial

    Eight Israeli soldiers were charged by the Israeli court and found guilty of murder. The two commanding officers of the unit, Malinki and Dahan, received 17 and 15 years’ imprisonment, respectively. These sentences were later reduced.
    Colonel Issachar Shadmi was tried and found guilty only of extending the curfew without authority. He was released after paying a fine of one Israeli cent. On November 1959, after two years, all eight convicted soldiers were released on orders by the Israel Committee for the Release of Prisoners .
    Malinki retained his military post and got a promotion to be in charge of security for a top secret Israeli Nuclear Research Center located in the Negev. Dahan was appointed as the head of the “Arab Affairs” department by the city of Ramla, another Palestinian village Israel taken over during 1948.
    During Israel’s creation in 1948, and years later, Israeli soldiers shot and killed hundreds of Palestinian civilians. No legal action has been taken against any Israeli leader, commander, or soldier involved in what would later become known as the Palestinian Nakba.

    PNN – Palestine News Network – Remembering The 54th Anniversary Of The Israeli Massacre In Kafr Qasim.

    Essential Read: The Promised Land ~ by Jad KhairAllah

    How many more dead corpses of Palestinians does the international community need to see in order to act? How many more cruelties and violations of Human Rights, Regulations and International Law will be needed to intervene so this ongoing warcrime is being stopped once and for all.

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    Gilad Atzmon: The Greatest Threat To World Peace

    Saturday, October 29, 2011 at 10:00AM AuthorGilad Atzmon

    According to Ynet Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are extremely concerned by the “Iranian threat”. Yedioth Ahronoth, the Israeli leading paper, reported this week that Netanyahu and Barak are pushing for action against Iran.
    According to Israeli leading columnist Nahum Barnea the heads of the armed forces –and Mossad are opposed to taking action against Iran at this time.

    Former Mossad Chief Meir Dagan had previously stated that an aerial attack on Iran was “a foolish idea” and warned against the disastrous consequences that would follow such action – an all out regional war. As it seems Dagan lost his job for expressing his views on the matter.

    It looks as if Israel are preparing the ground for an attack on Iran that would probably escalate into a vile world conflict. Israeli leadership seems to fail to grasp the meaning of it all. This leadership has managed to buy itself the reputation of being impervious to the notion of culpability and responsibility. It basically fails to understand the consequences of it is actions.

    But far more devastating is the idea that Jewish Lobbies around the world are also far from being responsible to their actions. Liam Fox who resigned last week from being the British Defence Secretary, was heavily supported by the Jewish Lobby. He was also an enthusiastic advocate of an attack on Iran. Whether Fox was a ‘Mossad agent’, a ‘Jewish lobby’s puppet’ or even just a ‘useful idiot’ is yet to be decided. However, he was clearly serving Israeli interests in our midst.
    But he wasn’t alone, at the moment 80% of our leading party are Conservative Friends of Israel.
    Isn’t the time ripe to drift as far as possible from Jerusalem and its stooges?

    River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

    %d bloggers like this: