Netanyahu On ‘The Jew’, Herzl and Tikkun Olam

By Gilad Atzmon

Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a fascinating speech yesterday at the memorial ceremony of Theodor Herzl in Jerusalem (27.6.2013). ‘The Jew’, stated Netanyahu, is the saver and the liberator of humanity. He and she are the true meaning of progress as conveyed by the notion of ‘Tikkun Olam’ (fixing the world).  ‘The Jew’, according to the Israeli PM, is the emblem of philosophical, ideological, spiritual, scientific and aesthetic innovation.

In his attempt to describe late 19^th Century Jewish life in Vienna, Netanyahu said “they (the Jews) rose and flourished in science, art, medicine, philosophy, music, journalism, business, economics – Jewish prosperity can not be described. Freud, Mahler, Schnitzler, Schoenberg, Wittgenstein who came from a Jewish home, Stefan Zweig…”

But then, like Herzl, Netanyahu accepts that in spite of all their greatness, European Jews were doomed – they were despised and were eventually subject to a horrendous fate. According to Netanyahu and his mentor Herzl, antisemitism is engraved in the Goy’s mind.  “People are willing to believe everything about the Jews,” he says.

Netanyahu draws his conclusion – The Jewish State is essential. “The Jewish state was founded in accordance with Herzl’s vision. It indeed united the Jewish genius”. But then he is forced to admit that actually, “Tikkun Olam is not protecting you (the Jews) … because the biased belief against us continues.”

Netanyahu is indeed coherent and consistent, but there is one small detail he may fail to see. It’s more than likely that  the so called ‘Goyim’ i.e. the rest of Humanity, are not that interested in the Judeo-centric notion of ‘Tikkun Olam’ – those ‘progressive’ and ‘moralist’ ideologies that are mainly concerned with: the primacy of Jewish suffering (holocaust religion), plundering oil from Muslims in the name of democracy (Neoconservatism), stealing from the rich in the name of Marx (Marxism) or stealing from the poor in the name of Milton Freidman (free market).

Netanyahu, Herzl and probably most Jewish ideologists always fail to detect the growing fatigue of ‘Tikkun Olam’ and its messengers. Zionists and Anti Zionists alike would do themselves and the rest of us a great favour once they gather that rather than ‘fixing the world,’ they better consider fixing themselves and their Jewish universe first.

End

Egypt Marks 1 Year on Mursi with Slogans “Leave”, “Legitimacy Is a Red Line”

Local Editor

Protesters started since early morning flocking to the streets of Cairo in two camps, one under the slogan “leave”, which gathered at Al-Tahrir square and Al-Ittihadiya Presidential Palace, and another one under the slogan “Legitimacy is a red line”, which gathered near Rabiha Al-Adawiyah mosque. After one year of Mohammad Mursi’s rule, thousands of protesters returned to Al-Tahrir square to form a million-man March, demanding the president to leave office and make early presidential elections.Protesters chanted and raised slogans against Mohammad Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.Public Committees closed the roads surrounding Al-Tahriri square and established entrances, and as part of the precautionary measures taken, tens of members searched people joining the protests and checked their IDs to ensure no thugs were present among them.In parallel, hundreds of protesters gathered around Al-Ittihadiya Presidential Palace and set up tents in the area amid strict security measures and a wide deployment of the security forces.In contrast, President Mursi’s supporters cut the roads leading to Rabiha Al-Aqawiyah square in the second day of protests under the slogan “Legitimacy is a red line”. Mursi’s supporters also took precautionary measures, and searched protesters before entering the square to ensure that no intruders join the protests. According to Al-Youm Al-Sabea (the seventh day), the protesters chanted slogans in support of Mursi and denouncing the opposition. Moreover, the website published images for supporters of Mursi, dancing with sticks and threatening the opposition. Flags for Al-Qaeda were also raised in Rabiha Al-Adawiya protests, according to Al-youm Al-Sabea and other sources. Al-Azhar Calls for Having Self-Control and Avoiding Violence For his part, Imam of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayyib called on the Egyptians to have self-control and avoid any kind of violence in Sunday’s protests. In a statement he issued on Sunday, Al-Tayyib stressed on the importance of considering the higher interest on this day and avoiding any act which would harm this benefit. Al-Tayyib had stressed on Saturday that the 30th of June must be a day for dialogue between opposing parts, and called upon Egyptians to act responsibly. US Embassy Shuts Doors For its part, the US embassy shut its doors to avoid any clash, and demanded its citizens to avoid travelling to Cairo, as sources said that it had evacuated its employees who did not work in security. In parallel, Al-Youm Al-Sabea website reported that 88 US nationals in Cairo had left the country on Saturday and Sunday.

Source: Agencies 30-06-2013 – 14:33 Last updated 30-06-2013 – 14:33 |

• Anti-Mursi Campaign Collects 22 Million Signatures

NEW VIDEO OF BEHEADING OF SYRIANS LOYAL TO THEIR GOVERNMENT HIGHLIGHTS BRUTALITY OF OPPOSITION

Posted on June 29, 2013         by Administrator

A video purportedly showing an extrajudicial public beheading of two Bashar Assad loyalists has been uploaded onto the internet. Its authenticity has been verified by pro and anti-Assad sources, though it remains unclear who is behind the execution.

In the nine-minute clip, a group of several hundred people, including men, women and children stands around a hill, when the sentenced men, bound with ropes and wearing bags on their heads are led out. As the crowd closes in with shouts of Allah Akbar (“Glory to God!”) the two, who are wearing civilian clothes, are laid on the floor, and a bearded ‘executioner’ methodically saws through the throat of first one, then the other with a knife. The heads of the dead men are then placed on top of their bodies as the crowd continues to bay.

The phone-filmed video was uploaded on Wednesday to video-sharing site YouTube by Syrian Truth, a group that supports President Bashar Assad, which previously uncovered a clip of an anti-government fighter eating what appeared to be a human heart. According to the voices in the footage, it was shot in Khan al-Assal, near the city of Aleppo the north of the country.

The authenticity of the video was also endorsed by resources that have chiefly backed the rebels in the internal conflict that has lasted over two years – such as the UK-based Observatory for Human Rights and all4Syria.info, which moved to condemn its contents.
The identities of all parties involved in the video remain unclear.

A man is heard on the tape charges the two ‘convicted’ men of transporting weapons and ammunition for the regular army.

“I did not transport weapons, brother” cries out the man, writhing on the ground, with his hands tied behind his back.

One of the men in the video shouts out “This is punishment for the Shabiha!”. The Shabiha is a loyalist, semi-official plain-clothes militia that Assad’s opponents say has been used to crack down on dissent in contested areas. The force was implicated by the United Nations in the Houla Massacre last year, in which as many as a hundred people may have died.

Various other media, sympathetic to Assad, claimed the men were Christians, executed for religious reason, with several alleging that one of those executed was a priest. No site supplied possible names of the condemned.
The identity of the executioners is also murky.

The Syrian National Coalition, which represents the mainstream opposition to Assad, said it was still running tests to verify whether the perpetrators were genuine rebel fighters, saying the sound and images may have been tampered with for propaganda purposes. It also insisted that the “rule of law” must be preserved, including the right of anyone captured to a “fair and free trial”.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on its Facebook page that “perpetrators spoke with a classical Arabic accent and did not sound Arabic, they sounded Chechniyan (sic)”. All4Syria also claimed the executioners were fighters from the former Soviet Union, possibly Uzbekistan or Azerbaijan. Snippets of Russian can be heard in the video.

Various local sources said the militia responsible may have been part of Jabhat al Nusra – the Al Qaeda-affiliated radical Islamist group that has swelled with foreign fighters and local recruits as the conflict has dragged on.

Videos of unconfirmed provenance, depicting atrocities and use of illegal weapons, have become an almost-daily feature of the war that has cost at least 90,000 lives according to the UN. An increasingly common aspect of the footage has been the disproportionate presence of often religiously-motivated paramilitary forces on both sides, as the culprits, suggesting that the conflict may have spiraled out of control of the main warring parties. RT

FSA MILITANTS WITH GAS MASKS AND CANISTERS

FSA MILITANTS WITH GAS MASKS AND CANISTERS

Posted on June 29, 2013         by Administrator 

By Syria Report

 

 

Footage obtained by Syria Report shows armed men from the Free Syrian Army (FSA) wearing gas masks, reported to be American-produced – while firing unidentified projectiles in Deir el-Zour. The launchers seen in the footage are similar to those used by riot police – it has been suggested that the projectiles could be crude, homemade grenades containing chemical agents.
An article by Syria Report detailed a counter-insurgent raid by Iraqi security forces, which uncovered an Al-Qaeda factory specializing in the production of sarin.

Classified as a weapon of mass destruction in UN Resolution 687, sarin is a colorless, odorless substance which is extremely difficult to detect. Owing to its potency as a nerve agent, sarin is an attractive choice for extremists and is not particularly difficult to manufacture.
On May 30, Turkish security forces busted a suspected Jabhat al-Nusra cell – unco vering two kilograms of sarin gas.

In early May, Syria Report published details which cast significant doubt on accusations of chemical weapons use by the Syrian army. The device reportedly used to deliver a chemical agent, allegedly sarin gas, was later photographed attached to the chest of a Jabhat al-Nusra militant.

Kerry in Last-Minute Push on “Peace Process”, 1000 New Settler Homes being built

Local Editor

US Secretary of State John Kerry made a last-minute push on Sunday to revive “peace talks” as Zionist media said that days of exhaustive shuttle diplomacy had failed to break the deadlock. Kerry has spent 13 hours with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu since Thursday, with the latest session between the two allies and their aides in the old city of Al-Quds. Kerry was scheduled to head to Ramallah in the West Bank on Sunday morning to consult for the third day in a row with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, a US official said. His previous two meetings with Abbas took place in Amman. Israel’s army radio painted a grim picture of Kerry’s initiative, saying that he has apparently failed in his goal of coaxing the sides back into direct negotiations after a gap of nearly three years. The Palestinian leader is pushing the Zionist entity to free the longest-serving Palestinian prisoners as a sign of commitment to peace, to remove roadblocks in the West Bank and to publicly agree to making the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war the baseline for negotiations. Army radio said that Netanyahu was willing to consider just the first two conditions — but only after talks were under way, and even then in stages. So far, Israel has flatly refused to countenance any return to the 1967 borders. Army radio also said that despite Kerry’s efforts, an Israeli committee was likely to push through a big discount for buyers of nearly 1,000 new homes which are due to be built in annexed east Al-Quds. The committee is due to meet on the issue on Monday.

Source: AFP 30-06-2013 – 11:52 Last updated 30-06-2013 – 11:52

EYEWITNESS REPORT OF THE BATTLE OF AL-QUASYR

Posted on June 29, 2013     by Administrator

By Syria Report

Kris Janssen, a Belgian journalist, wrote the following eyewitness account after he visited Al-Qusayr on 22 June during a visit to Syria.

Al-Qusayr is a small city in Homs governate (province). It is located about 35 kilometers from the provincial capital Homs and 15 kilometres from the Lebanese border overlooking a mountainous area.

Although its a small city, it has great strategic importance because of its proximity to Lebanon and it provides a direct gateway to the provincial capital of Homs, the coastal area around Tartous and also to Damascus countryside.

The small city of al-Qusayr grabbed the world’s headline news in the last couple of weeks because of the ferocious battle which took place between the extremist militants and the so called Free Syrian army supported by the international anti-Syrian coalition on the one hand and the Syrian National Army on the other hand. The battle for the liberation of al-Qusayr began on the 19th of May and ended on the 5th of June 2013 resulting in a decisive victory for the Syrian National Army.

Because of its strategic importance, the extremist militants designed a plan to capture al- Qusayr and to use the city as a launching pad for further attacks and terrorist actions. Their operations started in February 2012 and were build around the same tactics used before in other parts of Syria, especially in the city of Daraʼa near the Jordanian border.

Like Daraʼa, the city of al-Qusayr is near to a border, in this case the Lebanese border, which made it an easy target to infiltrate. The master plan was to have some rough elements infiltrating the city and making trouble after the Friday prayers as to provoke the security services and police. The extremist elements hoped for a heavy handed intervention of the security services and by doing so provoking violence and conflict between the civilian population and the security services. The local administration, well aware of these attempts, didn’t trap into this provocation and stayed as much as possible on the sidelines. When this provocation failed, some terrorists with a foreign nationality intervened and opened fire from sniper positions killing an innocent civilian hoping that the inhabitants would put the blame on the security services. This started a vicious cycle of violence and while making use of the confusion more terrorists infiltrated the city and began a campaign of sectarian cleansing in which they forced all Christians, Shi’a Muslims and Alawites out of the city or to be killed. When these families fled the city their houses were immediately taken by the terrorists and their belongings looted.

From this moment on they started to terrorise the remaining inhabitants who decided to stay and to attack the local police- and security services gradually taking over full control of al-Qusayr. It should be mentioned that some families refused to flee al-Qusayr and decided to stay whatever the cost and by doing so risking their lives and that of their relatives. One person became a local hero and a symbol for his actions representing others who made similar attempts to defend their streets and neighbourhoods till the last moment sacrificing their lives for the defence of the homeland. His name was Hanna (Arabic for John). Hanna was a Christian from al-Qusayr. When the extremist militants took over the city he refused to give in to the threats and organised with his family, friends and neighbours a self-defence brigade to protect his street and neighbourhood against the sectarian cleansing carried out by the terrorists. For more than four months he managed to defend the neighbourhood although fully surrounded by the extremists and even after the killing of his father and brother he continued his courageous defence efforts. When after four months Hanna himself was killed he became a symbol for the inhabitants of the city and the slogan “We are all Hanna” became a household name along the population of al-Qusayr used not only to honour Hanna but also to honour and remember all the other martyrs who gave their lives in the same circumstances to defend al-Qusayr and its inhabitants against the two barbaric acts of the terrorists. There was not only one Hanna but many Hanna’s who sacrificed their lives for the noble goal of freedom and against extremism.

Once the terrorists took over al-Qusayr, they began implementing their diabolic plan of destroying every possible symbol of peaceful coexistence between the inhabitants of al- Qusayr. They destroyed the local church, mosques and other important places where Shiʼa Muslims, Alawites or Christians used to come together.

Furthermore, these terrorist elements began to dig tunnels under all public buildings and placed explosives beneath them to blow them up. Especially those building which provided a service to the community as the public hospital that had such an excellent reputation that it even was used extensively by the Lebanese living over the border, but also schools, electricity- and water supply infrastructure were destroyed. The purpose of these destructions was to erase every form of peaceful cohabitation between the citizens of al- Qusayr and make living conditions so harsh as to force the Christian, Shiʼa and Alawite community out of the city or to be killed. It should also be mentioned that in the sick and twisted minds of these extremists the public buildings were not there to provide services to the population but symbolised the authority of the Syrian government. According to their vision the public hospital providing healthcare for the whole population of al-Qusayr and surroundings was “the hospital of Bashar al-Assad”. The schools providing education for the children of al-Qusayr were in analogy “the schools of Bashar al-Assad”, etc… . In this twisted logic every public building or infrastructure providing services to the population had to be destroyed bringing living standards in al-Qusayr back to the stone age.

On the 19th of May 2013, the Syrian National Army began a massive military operation to liberate al-Qusayr. This resulted in a decisive victory and the Syrian army regained full control of al Qusayr on June 5th. The terrorists, faced with an absolute defeat, began implementing the tactic of the scorched earth. While retreating, they carried out the destruction of the whole city by blowing up the remaining private houses or using them as hiding places to open fire on the advancing Syrian army. At the end of the battle of al- Qusayr, not a single house or building in the centre of the city was spared by the destructive actions of the terrorists. Not a single house or building in al-Qusayr was or demolished or heavily damaged. These destruction didnʼt really have a military tactical purpose but was carried out by these extremist militants for the sake of the destruction itself. To make a return by the inhabitants of al-Qusayr to their homes or what is left of it as difficult as possible and also to let the Syrian authorities face the tremendous task of rebuilding the demolished city from scratch.

The Western media were quick to accuse the Syrian army for the destruction of the city as a result of its military operations but all witness reports from the local inhabitants who were still trapped in the city during the battle point to the coalition of Jabhat al-Nusra fighters and the so called Free Syrian Army as the culprits and perpetrators of the destruction of al-Qusayr. Moreover, it would make no sense at all for the Syrian National Army to destroy the city and this for several reasons. First of all, the Syrian National Army is the army for every Syrian independent of their sectarian background. The ultimate goal of liberating al-Qusayr was to make it possible for all its citizens to return to their homes in safety to rebuild and continue their lives. Destruction of the city would make this goal much more difficult as everything has to be rebuilt and, most importantly, the local population put their trust in the Syrian army as defenders of the homeland. It would be totally illogical and contradictory to think that the Syrian army, being the liberators of al-Qusayr and defenders of the homeland, providing security to its citizens, would have an interest in destroying al-Qusayr. To underline the positive role of the Syrian army and authorities it must be stressed that the same day the Syrian National Army liberated al-Qusayr the 3 governor of Homs province came to the city to support the citizens and make an account of the destructions perpetrated by the terrorists.

Forthwith a full inventory was made of priority repairs to be done to provide the citizens as soon as possible with all the basic amenities and utilities to facilitate the return to their houses. Just days after the liberation of al-Qusayr workshops were already implementing these repairs restoring water and electricity to some parts of the city, removing debris and clearing streets.

Because of the scale of the destruction new power-lines and pipes for the distribution of electricity and water have to be rebuild all over the city but engineering units and mobile workshops are working day and night to gradually restore these services in every neighbourhood of al-Qusayr.

Another element of the battle of al-Qusayr which was highlighted in the Western media was the role played by the Hezbollah resistance movement in the liberation of the city. The view put forward by these Western media outlets was that without the direct involvement of Hezbollah the Syrian army would not have succeeded or would not have been able to liberate al-Qusayr and defeat the terrorists and extremists active in the city.

As an answer to these faulty statements made to influence and misinform the general public it should be underlined that the role of Hezbollah was a supportive role while the liberation of al-Qusayr and the accompanying military operations where fully carried out by the Syrian National Army according to a tactical plan designed and implemented by the command of the Syrian army itself. The main reason of the involvement of Hezbollah was to secure the border areas cutting off supply routes to the extremist militants and by securing the border areas also making sure that the conflict would not spill over to the villages on the Lebanese side of the border. Another aspect, generally not known by the Western public, is that a significant number of Lebanese citizens are living on the Syrian side of the border. These Lebanese civilians are extremely vulnerable as the Lebanese army cannot provide them with security because they are living on the Syrian side of the border and the Syrian army was fully engaged in liberating al-Qusayr and providing security to its own citizens. Because of this precarious situation, the Hezbollah movement had no choice as to intervene and secure the borders to avoid a massacre by the retreating extremists.

RELATED: QUSAYR, A TURNING POINT VICTORY IN AL-QSEIR A STRATEGIC TURNING POINT

THE MYTH OF THE SECULAR, PRO-DEMOCRACY “SYRIAN REBEL”

Posted on June 29, 2013     by Administrator

Even if there were secular Syrian rebels fighting for liberal democracy (and it’s not clear there are) they’d still be unworthy of support

By Stephen Gowans

Asked to justify his support for what his interlocutor called “Islamo-fascists,” a leftist sympathetic to the Syrian rebellion replied, “I’m not supporting radical Islamists. I support the Free Syrian Army’s fight for democracy.” With al-Qaeda aligned jihadists beheading some of their enemies and eating the organs of others, that’s the best case supporters of the Syrian rebellion can make these days. Unlike the radical Islamists, who dominate the rebellion and want to build a theocracy atop the hoped-for ruins of Syria’s secular Arab nationalist regime, the uprising’s Western leftist supporters are against dictatorship and for democracy. That’s why, they say, they’re backing the FSA.

But much as they believe they’re on the side on the angels, they’re not. The idea that the FSA is the secular, democratic front of a popular uprising ignores a number of problems, from a misunderstanding of what the FSA is, to blindness to the democratic reforms already carried out in Syria, to an unwarranted fondness for a political arrangement that would open the doors to US domination of Syria.

The “moderate” rebels

Let’s begin with the misunderstanding about the Free Syrian Army. There’s nothing secular about the FSA, and nothing democratic about it, either. The US-backed rebel army exists, according to its leaders, for one reason—to remove Bashar al-Assad as president. [1] Its sole program, then, is negative, without positive (either democratic or secular) aspirations.

You don’t have to be committed to a secular society to belong to the FSA. Indeed, according to Reuters, the organization’s military command is “Islamist dominated”. [2] The Associated Press says that “Many of the participating groups have strong Islamists agendas, and some have fought in ways that could scare away Western backers. They include the Tawheed Brigade, whose ideology is similar to that of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the Falcons of Damascus, an ultraconservative Islamist group.” [3] The Wall Street Journal reports that Brig. Gen. Mithkal Albtaish, an FSA leader, says that the organization is “dominated by Islamist groups that are in close coordination with al Nusra,” [4] the al-Qaeda aligned terrorist group. The idea, then, that the FSA is secular is mistaken.

Neither does the FSA have a political program committed to democracy. “Eliminate Assad” does not necessarily mean “create democracy.” It could mean “create theocracy” or “create a US-puppet regime.” Hence, what the FSA wants to replace Assad with, is not defined, but given that the organization is backed, armed, supported and guided by the United States, its European satellites, and Arab royalist dictators (an iconoclast has dubbed the loose alliance of rebel groups the Foreign Supplied Army) we can guess that the answer is: whatever the FSA’s backers, prime among them Washington, say. And let’s be clear. The FSA’s goal isn’t to eliminate Assad per se, but the policies Assad and his allies are committed to: economic nationalism; anti-colonialism; alliance with Iran; and so on, about which more in a moment. It is inconceivable that the United States and its FSA marionette would tolerate a successor to Assad who maintained Assad’s foreign and economic policies.

US foreign policy

The aim of US foreign policy is to defend and promote the interests of that section of the country’s citizens which has the greatest sway over its formation. This is by no means a unique feature of the foreign policy of the United States, but is a universal characteristic of the foreign policies of all countries. French, Russian, Chinese and British foreign policies are no different. For example, the basic priority of foreign policy in Britain—where the country’s business interests have a commanding influence over state policy— “is to aid British companies in getting their hands on other countries’ resources,” according to British foreign policy analyst Mark Curtis. Pointing to the role of one instrument of British foreign policy, the country’s foreign intelligence service, MI6, Curtis observes,

As Lord Mackay, then Lord Chancellor, revealed in the mid-1990s, the role of MI6 is to protect Britain’s ‘economic well-being’ by keeping ‘a particular eye on Britain’s access to key commodities, like oil or metals [and] the profits of Britain’s myriad of international business interests.’ [5]

The aim of US (or British) foreign policy is not to promote a particular kind of political regime in other countries. It, does not, contrary, to its own rhetoric, favour liberal democracies over other political systems, nor promote liberal democracy abroad, except insofar as liberal democratic political arrangements are congenial to the business interests of its most influential citizens. If fascist dictatorship, military autocracy or absolutist monarchy best serves the profit-making interests of preeminent US investors, banks and corporations at a particular time and place, the United States is happy to promote and defend these alternative regimes. For example, royal dictatorships abound among Washington’s Arab allies. Washington is comfortable having Arab dictators as friends because these regimes are congenial to US business, financial and military interests—recycling petro-dollars through US investment banks; cooperating with the US military, and in some case hosting US military bases; purchasing US military equipment; and implementing pro-US foreign investment and trade policies. When Arab dictators have become less accommodating, and more interested in promoting local interests, Washington has turned against them, reviling them as dictators to galvanize support at home for interventions to topple them, and replace them with more congenial (to wealthy US investor) rulers. “Rebel” journalist Wilfred Burchett put it this way: “The truth of the matter is that any country which can guarantee safety for British and American investments, no matter what the color of its regime, is acceptable to Whitehall and the White House, whether it be a personal dictatorship in Santo Domingo, clerical Fascist in Spain, semi Fascist in South Africa, or a gangster regime in a South American republic.” [6]

There are, then, two points—the first about goals and the second about means.

• The goal of US foreign policy is to promote the profit-making interests of its super-wealthy citizens who have goods to export and capital to invest. • Liberal democracy is sometimes seen as the best way to achieve this goal, but sometimes not. When liberal democracy is understood as the best arrangement, Washington will promote it. When a different political arrangement is understood to best support fundamental US foreign policy aims, Washington will promote that different political arrangement.

Is the United States promoting liberal democracy in Syria?

If it is, it is only doing so incidentally, and we don’t even know if it’s doing that. All we know is that Washington, like the FSA (or more precisely the FSA like Washington) wants to topple the Ba’ath regime and it’s easy to infer why. Damascus pursues too many objectionable policies from Washington’s point of view. First, there’s economic nationalism (subsidies to domestic firms, restrictions on foreign investment, tariffs to protect domestic industry, displacement of free enterprise by state-ownership—all of which limit US profit-making opportunities). Then there’s Syria’s refusal to recognize the Zionist conquest of Palestine (i.e., to recognize Israel.) Syria’s support for Hezbollah and alliance with Iran are also irritants, as is the country’s military cooperation with Russia. So, all we know is that Washington wants Assad gone—because his policies fail to mesh with the US foreign policy goal of making US investors, corporations and financiers richer.

At the moment, we can seriously doubt that the United States is working through the rebels to promote liberal democracy, because (a) the dominant part of the rebellion, the radical Islamists, abhor liberal democracy and are committed to a theocracy, and (b) the FSA is only committed to ousting Assad, and has no commitment to promoting democracy. But suppose the United States is indeed working to promote liberal democracy in Syria. Would a US-imposed liberal democracy be better than what currently exists in the country? Syria is in transition from a political arrangement which defined the Arab nationalist and socialist Ba’ath Party as the country’s lead political organization to a multi-party electoral democratic arrangement in which no party is primus inter pares. A constitutional amendment introduced under pressure of the Syrian revolt, and ratified by referendum, stripped the Ba’athists of their lead role in Syrian society, and scheduled a presidential election for 2014. Anyone who meets basic requirements can stand for election. At the same time, restrictions on civil liberties, implemented because Syria is in a technical state of war with Israel, were lifted. Thus, whoever backs the Syrian rebels on grounds that they’re bringing to birth a new liberal democratic order in Syria (of which we have no evidence that they are or even intend to do so) needs to show how the child that will be delivered through the pain of more war will be any different from the child that has already been delivered through Assad’s reforms.

There’s something else they need to explain. What’s so wonderful about a US-approved liberal democratic order? Liberal democracy appeals to the US’s power elite because it creates an “open society”—one which affords the wealthy elite plenty of room to use their command over their considerable resources to dominate the political process. They use their wealth and connections to place themselves and their representatives in key state decision-making positions; to lobby politicians and regulatory agencies; to bribe politicians with campaign funding and the promise of lucrative post-political jobs; and to hire public relations firms and establish foundations to set media and scholarly agendas. Through these means they concentrate state power in their hands (complementing their considerable economic power); win most political battles; and monopolize the society’s benefits.

An open Syrian society would allow the United States to act in Syria as the US corporate elite acts in the United States. It could buy influence by funding political candidates and parties that are pro-West, pro-US, pro-free-trade, pro-Israel, and pro-foreign-investment. It could allow the State Department to funnel money to local media to promote US positions (openly, through the National Endowment for Democracy, or covertly, if necessary). And Washington could bankroll NGOs, either directly or through private foundations, to garner popular support for policies favorable to US interests. The outcome would be that state power would be concentrated in the hands of US lackeys; US interests would win out in political battles with local interests; and the US corporate elite would monopolize the benefits of the Syrian economy. That’s not democracy. It’s neo-colonialism.

Conclusion

There are two kinds of rebels in Syria. Those who openly promote theocracy. And those whose only public commitment is to eliminate Assad. The military command of the latter includes secular elements but is Islamist-dominated. Their goals, beyond eliminating Assad, are undefined—perhaps concealed. They may want to create a theocracy, or a US-puppet regime, or both, or something else altogether. They are also armed, trained, backed and politically supported by the United States, its European satellites, and Arab royal dictatorships.

The United States supports foreign organizations that can help advance the interests of that section of the US population which holds sway over US foreign policy formation—wealthy bankers, major investors and huge corporations looking for export and investment opportunities abroad. It does not support democratic organizations—those that seek to promote the interests of the people in the countries in which US investors and corporations seek to do business. The belief, then, that there exists a popular uprising in Syria for democracy that, despite its being backed by the United States, can still be an instrument for promoting the interests of Syrians, is found on mistaken ideas about who the rebels are and a misunderstanding of the nature of US foreign policy. To square this circle, one would have to believe that the interests of the US corporate elite are congruent with, and not inimical to, the interests of the vast majority of Syria’s people.

But even if, indeed, we could say that Washington is backing some of the rebels on the ground with the aim of creating a liberal democracy in Syria, we would still have to ask two questions. First, would this political system, which is to be secured at the cost of many more tens of thousands of lives in a continued war, be any better than the one already conceded by the Assad government? Second, would an open society—one affording plenty of room for US forces to dominate Syria’s public and economic life—be preferable to a less open one, whose restrictions guard against foreign domination and allow the state to pursue local interests?

1. Zeina Karam, “In rare public appearance, Syrian president denies role in Houla massacre”, The Associated Press, June 3, 2012. 2. “Syrian rebels elect head of new military command,” Reuters, December 8, 2012. 3. Bassem Mroue and Benn Hubbard, “Syria rebels create new unified military command,” Associated Press, December 8, 2012. 4. Inti Landauro and Stacy Meichtry, “Rebels in Syria move to show moderation”, The Wall Street Journal, June 27, 2013 5. Mark Curtis, Web of Deceit: Britain’s Real Role in the World, Vintage, 2003, pp.210-211. 6. Wilfred Burchett, excerpt from People’s Democracies, in George Burchett and Nick Shimmin (eds.), Rebel Journalism: The Writings of Wilfred Burchett, Cambridge University Press, 2007, p. 45.

White House Threatens to Cut-off Aid if Palestine Joins ICC

Franklin Lamb

Beirut Al manar Fatou Bom Bensouda, the Gambian-born deputy prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), was never Washington’s first choice to succeed the inveterately self-promoting elitist ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo.And it is doubtful that key Obama administration officials have changed their minds this week given Ms. Bensouda’s impassioned invitation on 6/27/13 to Palestine, urging its accession to the Rome Statute and the ICC, the former signed and ratified, as of this month, by 122 states with 31 additional countries, including Russia, having signed with ratification pending in their legislatures. Visiting Al Jalil UNWRA high school across from Shatila camp here in Beirut recently, this observer was asked several questions by students and staff and the most frequent inquiry, which came as no surprise,  concerned why the Lebanese government, even those who claim to support the Palestinian cause, still have not acted in Parliament to grant Palestinian refugees the same elementary civil right to work and to own a home that every refugee everywhere, even in Zionist occupied Palestine, have long enjoyed. The second most commonly asked question, did surprise me a bit and it was why the Palestinian leaders in Ramallah have not joined the International Criminal Court (ICC) in order to challenge the criminal, apartheid regime in occupied Tel Aviv and hold it accountable under international humanitarian law for crimes against Palestinian prisoners and more than a dozen equally brutal campaigns that target the indigenous population increasingly being condemned internationally. From my time visiting Al Jalil School, it became clear that the students and faculty want their country, Palestine, to join the ICC.  One is advised that this sentiment is the same in all 54 Palestinian refugees’ schools in Lebanon and this insistence mirrors virtually all Palestinian, camps, groups and NGO’s with whom I have discussed the subject. The new ICC Prosecutor Bensouda is also encouraging Palestine to join the International Criminal Court, as she prepares for the cases that are likely to be filed with the ICC in the coming months.   Addressing this week’s Transitional Justice and International Justice the Arab World conference, she declared that her office believes Palestine qualifies to join the ICC after the UN General Assembly voted to admit Palestine as a non-member state last November. The ICC prosecutor’s office is rumored in The Hague to be particularly impassioned and focused on those areas in which their chief, Ms. Bensouda, has particular international legal expertise. With the main area being international crimes comprising the category of continuous crimes against humanity, which, arguably, since 1948, have been most egregiously committed by the last 19th century colonial enterprise that still brutally occupies Palestine. Prosecutor Bensouda and her ICC staff is reported to be particularly intent on investigating continuing violations of basic humanitarian principles, standards and rules and both have spoken about the case  of Palestinian Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh, a cancer-sufferer who died in Israeli custody on 6/25/13 after the  Israeli government rejected repeated international calls and protests for his release. This, even as its officials conceded that Mr. Abu Hamidiyeh was no threat to society and could likely be successfully treated if allowed medical treatment for his life threatening condition.  One ICC investigator, who asked for anonymity, stated that she and her colleagues considered the actions of the Netanyahu government with respect to the Abu Hamidiyeh, and similar cases, to be “sick!” The White House and its allies are not pleased by prospects for an eventful next few years at the ICC. What have particularly unnerved outgoing UN Ambassador, Susan Rice and Israeli PM Netanyahu, are the 5/23/13 comments of Ms. Bensouda during the 38th FIDH Congress in Istanbul which celebrated the 15th anniversary of the Rome Statute which created the ICC. “Gone are the days when those who commit international crimes, could be cleansed of their atrocities through a mere hand shake and a scribble of their initials on a piece of paper which purports to bind them to conditions that they have no intention of ever observing.”  She added: “My challenge is to consolidate what has been achieved, to build on from it, and to answer victims’ calls for justice. That is the promise made in Rome and that is the promise we cannot fail to fulfill”. One the several “going out the door” comments Ms. Rice made on cleaning out her UN office on her way to become President Obama’s National Security Adviser, was basically a reiteration of her livid expressions made following last fall’s UN General Assembly vote giving Palestine its new international status.  When asked if she considered the UN vote a repudiation of the Obama administration and her personally, Ms. Rice scolded: “That resolution is not going to take them closer to statehood, or to the ICC!  It may actually make the environment more difficult for them and public references to the “State of Palestine” do not make it a sovereign state. Any reference to the ‘State of Palestine’ in the United Nations, including the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ on the placard in the Security Council or the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ in the invitation  do not reflect acquiescence that ‘Palestine’ is a state,” she said. It may be recalled that in a letter addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the President of the UN Security Council immediately following the 11/29/12  General Assembly vote, the permanent UN observer of Palestine reiterated his delegation’s position that “all Israeli settlement activities are illegal, constituting grave breaches of article 49 (6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention and thus constituting war crimes, as further determined in accordance with  article 8 (2) (b) (viii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Israel, the occupying Power, must be held accountable for all of the war crimes it is committing against the Palestinian people.” This letter was cited by the most recent UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) report of February 2013, which also found Israel, as an occupying power, in violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention for “transferring parts of its civilian population into territory that it occupies.” Adding to all its currents problems, is this week’s announcement that President Obama’s “favorite general,” Retired Gen. James “Hoss” Cartwright will likely cause yet more serious problems for the administration when details of his suspected leaks of information about a covert U.S.-Israeli cyber-attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program, for which he is expected to soon be arrested and indicted. Coming on the heels of the Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks case, Washington is said to have no patience whatsoever, for Palestine making more problems and opening an ICC Pandora’s box. Ramallah is being flooded with threats this month from Middle East envoy, Tony Blair, US Secretary of State, John Kerry, now on his 5th visit to the Middle East in as many months, Jordan’s King Abdullah II and reportedly, several others.  The message for Mahmoud Abbas is that the Palestinian Authority risks a cut-off of funds and US dis-engagement from any “peace process” as well as the scrapping  of the rumored “mega economic & development  package” which Kerry aids are currently finalizing, if Palestine goes anywhere near the International Criminal Court. It’s a tough call for President Mahmoud Abbas and his supporters because Hamas wants Palestine to immediately file cases against Israel at the ICC and so it appears, do a large majority of Palestinians, in Lebanon and internationally.

Source: Al-Manar Website 29-06-2013 – 15:24 Last updated 29-06-2013 – 15:24

Egypt: A Brief Account of Mursi’s First Year

An Egyptian man crosses a railway track as a giant poster against President Mohamed Morsi hangs from electrical cables near the presidential palace in Cairo on 29 June 2013. (Photo: AFP – Gianluigi Guercia)

By: Saif Daana

Published Saturday, June 29, 2013

After a year of Mohamed Mursi occupying Egypt’s highest office, a chorus of criticism directed toward his presidency is rising from all quarters, ahead of mass protests against him on June 30.

One of Egypt’s leading journalists, Mohammed Hassanein Heikal, put it recently in a television interview, “Mursi committed three disasters in the past three weeks, each one capable of leading to the downfall of the regime.”In this regard, Heikal specifies the president’s handling of opposition plans to hold protests against his regime, the way he has dealt with Ethiopia’s bid to build a major dam on the Nile, and his recent rally appearance in which he cut off diplomatic relations with Syria.Heikal’s sentiments were echoed by Hassan Nafaa, a prominent professor of politics, noting that the president has “lost his political sense,” particularly in his irresponsible appearance at an Islamist rally in support of the Syrian opposition, in which he declared cutting off diplomatic ties with Damascus.
The problem is not only with the strategic disaster such a decision represents, but with Mursi giving official cover to dangerous sectarian slogans that were repeated in the presence of the leader of the largest Arab country.

It is worth noting here that both Heikal and Nafaa argued for giving Mursi a chance when he was first elected and have written as much on more than one occasion. Today, both have come to the conclusion that the president had failed completely to anticipate crises and take measures to diffuse or resolve them before they explode.

For example, Mursi’s response to Ethiopia’s Nile dam plan was to call for a national dialogue in which politicians were caught on live television advocating sabotage and using racist language. Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood’s problem is not only a matter of a lack of experience, as some have suggested, it is rather their stubborn insistence on ignoring Egypt’s geography and history.

Their record so far is but a caricature of the Sadat and Mubarak eras that sought to shed Egypt’s leading role in the region and all traces of Gamal Abdel Nasser’s legacy. This time, however, the counter-revolution comes in an Islamist guise, with the aim of suffocating Egypt’s second, January 25, revolution.
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

• Egypt’s Tamarrud: A Revolution for the Lazy?
•  قتلى وأكثر من 600 مصاب ..3كتل برلمانية تعلن استقالتها تضامنا مع معارضي مرسي
• نبؤة لنوستراداموس بقرب سقوط شنيع لمحمد مرسي
• هل تُسقط تظاهرات الأحد الرئيس المصري؟

ON THE WAY OF NO RETURN

Maybe this has to do with covering the defeat of the opposition in Syria where the Syrian army is progressing on all fronts- especially in the vicinity of Damascus -and now has almost secured the road between Homs and Damascus in an attempt to keep major cities linked together .Tal Kalakh has surrendered without battle . Armed people have just handed in their weapons to th…e army . Luckily enough they are local people . Now, another area on the Lebanese Syrian border has returned to the authorities without spilling blood- this time -or causing any destruction .

What is happening in Syria is writing the next sequence of events . The abdication of the prince of Qatar –due to the failure in Syria and under US pressure- in favor of his younger son, caused somehow the ending of the al Asir phenomenon in Lebanon – which is a Qatari phenomenon- that Qatar is trying to put term to one way or another. The new Qatari prince might be seeking a new start but has received- already – the blessings of the Israelis promising that he will not commit any foolishness .

The quantity of weapons discovered in al Asir quarters in Saida is unbelievable , the most sophisticated weapons and big amounts of money were found . Recruits were paid a minimum of 600 dollars and salaries could reach 2 thousand dollars a month. The scheme originally sought the clash between al Asir armed people and the Resistance people , but ended in a clash with the Lebanese army and 18 soldiers were killed before the army responded and chased out the thugs from the vicinity of Saida .

Every one knows in Lebanon that Qatar is funding all this masquerade.. Al Asir has escaped and some officials from the Security seem to have facilitated his escape and that of his family who are all holders of Qatari passports. Number of Palestinians and Syrians were fighting on the side of al Asir along with Lebanese , many of his assistants fled with him.

While Lebanon is under threat from sectarianism fueled by Gulf countries’ Intelligence Services and their Media and their hired mercenaries , other Muslim and Arab countries are subject to different pressures and upheavals . They are witnessing a new season of Spring starting from the Taqsim Square in Istanbul and not ending with Maydan al Tahreer , Cairo..

The situation in these countries is most dangerous . It is threatening the social web itself whereby the country will remain divided and unable to proceed . No one can save Mursi now , not even al Azhar -who has given license to peaceful demonstrations against the president- nor Sheikh al Qaradawi whose visit to Cairo is expected soon . The army has spread its forces widely and will not allow any escalation of the situation . Every one says that the future seems uncertain . The country is deeply divided and both parties are determined to reach their goal, all major cities are witnessing this division and both parties are rallying one against the other . The al Azhar has warned against escalation into civil unrest and civil war and is refraining from taking a stand either way . The repercussions on all countries of the defeat of the Syrian opposition cannot be measured . Egypt- who supported the opposition and hosted it but did not get directly involved in the Syrian mud- has to pay its share of instability like Turkey and Qatar and soon KSA .

These upheavals are all a cover for US stunning defeat in Syria and all countries would have to make up for their short comings and sacrifice whatever they enjoy in terms of stability that has gone out of Egyptian hands for example . It will be very difficult to bring these people back to the place where they belong and to recover a form of stability. The foreign affiliated NGOs who are active on the ground will not let this happen, the whole of society has been infiltrated . The only solution for Egypt is- as expressed by al Ahram-assistant director – to have legislative elections take place in due time and which will bring to the parliament the representatives of the people and will help the country get out of this dead end. All this while Syria and Lebanon will regain slowly their stability.

Egypt Journalists Respond to Mursi’s Attack on the Press

An Egyptian opposition supporter holds a crossed-out picture of President Mohammed Morsi as hundreds gather for a demonstration against Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo’s landmark Tahrir Square on 29 June 2013. (Photo: AFP – Gianluigi Guercia)

By: Medhat Safwat

Published Saturday, June 29, 2013

Cairo – It was just a coincidence that two events related to the freedom of the press took place on Wednesday, the same day that Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi gave a speech attacking journalists.That day, the Federation of Arab Journalists held a press conference to read its annual report on press freedoms in 18 Arab nations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Press Council held a workshop titled “The Role of the Press in Uncovering Corruption.”

A few hours later, Mursi was attacking the press, which he claimed was “inciting sabotage and working on behalf of the former regime,” vowing to prosecute some journalists and opposition activists in military tribunals.

According to the Federation of Arab Journalists’ report, Egypt remained at the bottom of the press freedom index (ranked 158 out of 179 countries), as prosecution and physical assaults targeting journalists continued. The report mentioned the closing down of several news outlets like al-Shaab al-Jadid and al-Dustur. Other violations included the prosecution of 12 journalists on charges of “insulting the president.”

Meanwhile, accusations of “insulting religion” continue to be doled out against opinion-makers, and many writers were put on trial and sentenced to prison. This is civilian cases continued to be referred to military tribunals, totaling 53 in the first year of Mursi’s reign.

In his speech, Mursi singled out some journalists and media outlets, led by former president of the Journalists Syndicate Makram Mohammed Ahmed, whom the president said was one of the fulul or the holdovers of the deposed Mubarak regime. Mursi also attacked Mohamed al-Amin, CEO of al-Mustaqbal, the company that owns CBC television and the daily al-Watan, whom Mursi accused of tax evasion, shortly before the Egyptian prosecutor general issued a travel ban against Amin.

Later, Ahmed told al-Hayat TV that he would consult with the Journalists Syndicate to respond to Mursi’s allegations. “For most of the time, I preferred making reforms [to the existing regime]. But Mursi is the one to blame for turning me into a rebel, by issuing the constitutional declaration that gave him god-like powers,” he said.

Earlier that day, the council of the Journalists Syndicate declared that its members would take part in the June 30 protests. The syndicate will also establish a hotline to report any assaults on journalists in the country.

On Thursday, the syndicate’s council issued a strongly worded statement condemning Mursi’s accusations against the syndicate’s former president, who was elected by the journalists for five terms and who had habitually intervened to prevent military trials against Brotherhood supporters. The statement called Mursi’s tactics a sign of “political bankruptcy that is unbefitting of the presidency.”
For its part, Egypt’s National Committee for the Defense of Freedom of Expression voiced its alarm by what it called a campaign to intimidate journalists. Yahya Qalash, a founding member of the committee, told Al-Akhbar that Mursi was mimicking late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat, in trying to appear strong and threaten “those who uncover and expose the corruption of his regime.”
Qalash went on to say that Mursi is conducting himself as “the president of a party and not of a state as pivotal as Egypt.”

Meanwhile, the Committee for an Independent Press said that the president’s speech “contained a blatant assault against the press and unjust questioning of the patriotism of some journalists.” The committee’s secretary Bashir al-Adl pointed out that the Muslim Brotherhood’s first year in power saw the sacking of more than 500 journalists, while 12 newspapers were shut down.

The Electronic Journalists Syndicate also issued a statement in reaction to Mursi’s speech, and said that the president’s incitements “have ended the legitimacy of his regime, which had pledged not to confiscate opinions or persecute journalists.”

On Friday, TV anchor Jamal al-Shaer resigned on air (see video), in what was an unprecedented development in the history of Egyptian state television. Shaer said his move was motivated by the cancellation of his show and the meddling of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned Minister of Information Salah Abdul-Maqsoud in the affairs of Egyptian state media.

He said, “We tolerated a full year of this insanity. Because we are under a fascist information minister, and because of this insistence on imposing the Brotherhood’s ideology on Egyptian media, I hereby resign, on air.”

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

Gabi Weber: The Gatekeeper of Freiburg University

Gabi Weber: The Gatekeeper of Freiburg University

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 10:10AM Gilad Atzmon

Introduction by Gilad Atzmon: defeating Israel and The Lobby in a Western court, let alone, Germany, is a rare event. The following article tells the story of such a victory. It exposes the work of  Dr. Heinrich Schwendemann,  a shameless Sabbath Goy and a Holocaust Industry pedlar. Café Palestine Freiburg has managed to unveil his tactics and his destructive power within the University.

The Gatekeeper of Freiburg University

By Gabi Weber

http://othersite.org/gabi-weber-the-gatekeeper-of-freiburg-university/

Six weeks ago, the University of Freiburg was defeated by Cafe Palestine (Press Release)  when five judges at the Administrative Court of Freiburg rejected the  university’s arguments for denying Cafe Palestine a venue for one of its  speakers. Surely it is now time to delve a little more deeply into this unprecedented case which deserves close attention.

At the centre of it all we find one Dr.  Heinrich Schwendemann, Freiburg University historian and a founder of one of many German Holocaust memorial sites Shoa.de. 

A year ago, Cafe Palestine invited Dr.  Schwendemann, together with Prof. Norton Mezvinsky the renowned American Jewish historian to participate in a panel at Freiburg University. Also participating was Gilad Atzmon, the Jazz artist and author of “The Wandering Who – A Study of Jewish Identity Politics”.  This much discussed book has been endorsed by some of the most important scholars and intellectuals of our time with a German edition published in June 2012.

Dr. Schwendemann enthusiastically accepted the  invitation but, three  days before the event, he changed his mind  insisting that reading Atzmon’s book made it impossible for him to share  a platform with somebody who is “relativising the Holocaust”.  The  event took place without Dr. Schwendemann (Speech Gilad Atzmon), (Speech Prof. Mezvinsky)

In July 2012, Cafe Palestine planned to host another talk at  Freiburg University featuring French professor Christophe Oberlin from  Paris. The talk was titled “Plastic Surgery in Gaza” and was set to  attract the attention of the local medical community as well as  Palestine supporters and humanists. But Cafe Palestine soon learned that  the university had decided to withdraw use of the venue. Smelling a  rat, Cafe Palestine looked closely into this cancellation and after  having received the letter from the University outlining the reasons for  the cancellation, decided to issue a complaint at the Administrative Court.

It became clear that the University has been  foolish enough to allow itself to be guided by Dr. Schwendemann, even  going so far as to make Schwendemann part of its legal team.  Schwendemann duly appeared at the Administrative Court at the  defendant´s desk together with the University’s lawyer and a University  representative.

When it was  time for the University to present its defence, it was to Schwendemann  to whom it turned as its expert witness. Unfortunately, the arguments  presented by Schwendemann were so off-topic as to be simply  embarrassing. According to Schwendemann, Cafe  Palestine Freiburg´s crime was in bringing Gilad Atzmon as a speaker and  in translating his talks without comment which, according to   Schwendemann, meant that Cafe Palestine must be in complete accord with  absolutely everything Atzmon says and must fully support all his  political views. In fact, Cafe Palestine Freiburg doesn’t actually agree with everything  Gilad Atzmon or for that matter, any other participant of the talks,  says but does believe that Atzmon’s, as well as all the other speakers´  ideas deserve public attention, discussion and critical thought. It  further believed that Freiburg University was a most appropriate  platform for this discussion as was proved by the vivid debate that was  provoked by the Mezvinsky-Atzmon panel.Although the arguments against Atzmon delivered  by Schwendemann and the University were so ridiculous and out of order  that the Court dismissed them completely and rejected the University´s  defence altogether, it is still well worth examining their arguments  because they provide us with a glimpse into those powerful but  destructive mechanisms that interfere with our most precious rights and  liberties.

The University’s lawyer wrote that “According to Dr. Schwendemann”,  Atzmon’s book “contains the entire anti-Semitic arsenal including Holocaust Relativism” but failed to explain exactly what it was that makes Atzmon into a ‘relativist’.

Then, “According to (Atzmon’s book)  the Jews were made responsible for all evil,” at  which point it became embarrassingly obvious that Schwendemann, as well  as the University attorney had either not read the book or even more  worryingly, had failed to understand it. Atzmon’s book  is, as its title  suggests, ‘a study of Jewish Identity politics’. It refers to ideology  (Jewish identity politics) not to people (Jews) – a point Atzmon makes  clear numerous times in the text.

Atzmon may be right and he may be wrong, but his  ideas deserve attention and discussion and the University of Freiburg is  surely the place for this.

Schwendemann did state that “Atzmon declares that he is conducting his own personal war against Zionism and Jewish identity politics.” Yet, neither the historian nor the University explained what exactly is  wrong with criticism of a political standpoint –  or is it just that  political criticism to be outlawed in Freiburg University?

It took the Court under an hour to grasp that Freiburg University  was wrong and ruled the University’s conduct unlawful. Cafe Palestine  Freiburg and justice itself had won a landmark victory. Since then, the  University has assured Cafe Palestine that future applications for space  will be treated impartially.  A talk with Professor Oberlin from Paris  is planned for October.

So here are two question we might ask ourselves:

1. Why did this  German historian not take the opportunity to challenge Atzmon in the  open debate organised by Cafe Palestine Freiburg in July 2012 rather  than  act clandestinely, denying ‘the accused’ the possibility to defend  himself.

2. Do we need a German  from Freiburg University to tell an Israeli-born intellectual, who has  served in the Israeli Military during the first Lebanon war, how to deal  with his own society and its ideologies, his own past, his own culture  and the future? Is it not enough that the “Schwendemanns” of our time tell the Germans what to think?

And one more…. How is it possible that a prominent German university with the words “The Truth Will Set You Free”  engraved in gold over one of its entrances follows the orders of  someone like Dr. Heinrich Schwendemann – a man who by his conduct has  managed to set new standards of a lack of intellectual integrity and  clumsy scholarship. 

The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics  Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk

Maliki warns of ‘Sectarian and Takfirisit Fatwas” Threatening Iraq, Region

Maliki warns of ‘Sectarian and Takfirisit Fatwas” Threatening Iraq, Region

Local Editor

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki warned on Saturday of the dangers of sectarian and takfirist fatwas that threaten Iraq and the region, calling on Iraqis to stand united in order to protect the country. During a central ceremony in Baghdad to celebrate the withdrawal of Iraq from Chapter VII of the UN Security Council, Maliki said that “the most dangerous thing we face is the return of sectarian mobilization and political tension that surround the area with a new storm of murder, fatwas and takfirism. “Iraq, as well as all states of the region, was not spared from this storm,” he stated, calling on Iraqis “to stand united in the face of the storm to mitigate its effects on the country facing the takfirist speech and fatwas of murder and incitement issued here and there in a clear process to tear the fabric of our communities.” The prime minister stressed that “the silence on the fatwas and incitement and sectarian killings is imminent danger that threatens everyone.” Iraqi Prime Minister also noted that “the situation calls upon us to reject the trends and policies that weaken our country for the benefit of this regional party or another,” stressing at the same time the establishing of the best and blessed relations with the countries of the region and the world. Addressing the politicians, Maliki said: “Dear brothers and sisters responsible for building of Iraq, our future depends on our attitude, and we have no choice but to live as loving brothers without turning to rival groups, sects and nationalities.” “Let us reject the speech of sectarianism and sectarians to protect our country and our people from the evil and destruction,” he added. He also appealed to the political currents in the country to sit at the dialogue table to achieve the national reconciliation in order to serve the march of political work in the country. The ceremony, attended by senior officials, including Vice President Khudair Alkhozai and a large number of ministers and representatives of diplomatic missions to Iraq, was held to celebrate Iraq’s withdrawal from Chapter VII,  which the country had been underwent to it, after the invasion of Saddam Hussein’s regime of Kuwait in 1990.

Source: Al-Manar Website 29-06-2013 – 16:29 Last updated 29-06-2013 – 16:29

• Maliki: Iraq to Hunt down Terrorists behind Deadly Attacks

Football and Palestine (must watch)

Saturday, June 29, 2013 at 11:03AM Gilad Atzmon

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSgqErDOAwI

Published on Jun  4, 2013

A film by Gregg McDonald of Consequential Films
Producers, Hugh Tisdale and Deborah Rich of Philosophy Football
In the autumn of 2011 Philosophy met Honey Thalijeh, then captain of the Palestine Women’s Football team.
Honey  told us the story of football in her country and we made a promise.  That for Euro 2013, the Under 21s tournament hosted by Israel, we would  visit Palestine to make a film and help tell the world what football  means for ordinary Palestinians living on the other side of the wall  Israel built to encircle and occupy their land.
The film was  made on the eve of Israel hosting Euro 2013. Filmed, cut and edited in  the space of 48 hours this is politically-committed reportage at its  rapid and rough best. It was premiered at the Palestine Olympic  Association HQ in Ramallah. Please spread this film far and wide.
The Palestine Football Supporters Club T-shirt is available at http://www.philosophyfootball.com

Protest Chaos Governs Egypt: At Least 3 Dead

Local Editor Fear and uncertainty descended on Egypt Friday night as supporters and opponents of President Mohammad Mursi took to the streets for rival protests two days ahead of mass demonstrations planned Sunday to demand his ouster. Amid fears of escalating violence in the days ahead of the planned protest marking a year since Mursi was elected with a narrow majority, Egypt’s leading religious figures appealed for calm.Sporadic violence in the lead up to Sunday has left six people dead.In parallel, an American was stabbed to death in Alexandria during clashes between supporters and opponents of Mursi after earlier clashes in the city saw one man shot dead and around 10 injured. Overnight Thursday a member of the Muslim Brotherhood was also shot dead in the Nile Delta town of Zagazig. Preachers of the ancient al-Azhar Islamic institute warned of impending civil war, calling on Mursi opponents to scrap their plans for mass rallies and accept his offer of dialogue in a sign of impending chaos. “Vigilance is required to ensure we do not slide in to civil war,” said preachers from the group. But the atmosphere is undoubtedly tense and the opposition seems resolute. Tahrir Square, the focal point of mass demonstrations in early 2011 that saw the overthrow of dictator Hosni Mubarak was filled by mid-afternoon with protesters and their tents, indicating a determination to stay put. Food and drink stands appeared, ready to fuel the growing crowds. The opposition claims to have gathered 15 million signatures calling for Mursi to stand down – 2 million more than the number of votes he received when he was elected – and expects many of those to turn out Sunday. The Muslim Brotherhood issued a statement warning of “dire consequences that will put the country into a violent spiral of anarchy.” Meanwhile, senior Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammad al-Beltagui warned opposition protesters Friday that “we will not allow a coup against the president.” Closely watched Sunday will be Egypt’s army. Egypt’s army Wednesday brought in reinforcements of troops and armor to bases near Egyptian cities ahead of June 30 protests and has warned it will intervene again if there is violence “to defend the will of the people.” Both sides have interpreted that to mean they will support their positions. Source: News agencies, Edited by website team   Egypt clashes kill four ahead of mass anti-Mursi demos 29-06-2013 | 08:47

David Cameron’s “Torah” government

Britain’s unbearable shame

By Stuart Littlewood

Ten years ago Tam Dalyell, the “Father of the House” (i.e. the most senior member of the House of Commons in the British Parliament), sparked a huge row by accusing the then prime minister, Tony Blair, of “being unduly influenced by a cabal of Jewish advisers”.

In an interview with Vanity Fair, Dalyell named Lord Levy (Blair’s personal envoy on the Middle East), Peter Mandelson (whose father was Jewish) and Jack Straw, the foreign secretary (who has Jewish ancestry), as three of the leading figures who had influenced Blair’s policies on the Middle East.

He told The Telegraph: “If it is a question of launching an assault on Syria or Iran… then one has to be candid.” Blair, he said, was also indirectly influenced by Jewish people in the Bush administration, including Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser, Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defence secretary, and Ari Fleischer, the president’s press secretary.

Dalyell’s remarks were sad and unfounded, said Lord Janner, chairman of the Holocaust Education Trust. “Tony Blair is his own man. He will follow advice if he considers it correct and not otherwise. He has been a good friend of the Jewish people and the Jewish state.”

Dalyell was misguided, said Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, a spokesman for Britain’s Reform Synagogues. “Concerning Iraq it was crystal clear that Tony Blair was not swayed by popularity or anyone else but by his own deep convictions. It is also obvious that the majority of President Bush’s circle are Christian Evangelicals rather than Jews.”

Ned Temko, the American-born editor of the Jewish Chronicle, said: “I just think these sort of comments are offensive and are a profound misunderstanding of the way foreign policy is made in the United States or here.”

Dalyell also told The Scotsman on Sunday:

Blair and Straw have become far too close to these people and Lord Levy, who is an unaccountable ambassador in the Middle East, is part of this group. They are acting on an extremely Zionist, Likud-nik agenda. In particular I am concerned that some of them are pushing for an attack on Syria, for reasons of Israeli security.

MP Louise Ellman, a member of the Inter-Parliamentary Committee Against Anti-Semitism, said: “This absurd proposition implies a Jewish plot in high places…”

Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, a senior member of Scotland’s Jewish community, was rudely dismissive: “We all know that Tam gets bees in his bonnet and eight times out of 10 they are nuts but the other two are brilliant. This is, I’m afraid, one of the nutty ones.”

The next day the Guardian reported that Dalyell could face an investigation for inciting racial hatred. Eric Moonman, President of the Zionist Federation, was seeking advice on whether there was a case for referral. “I believe there is,” he said.

Today it is obvious that old Tam was neither nutty nor misguided. He joined the dots and saw the danger, as did many others.

“So many Jews that the Tory party should be known as the Torah party”

Meanwhile the Jewish cabal flourishes. A week ago Ian Livingston was handpicked by Prime Minister David Cameron for the trade minister job. Cameron, who had previously broken with traditional wisdom and appointed the first Jewish ambassador to Israel, was reported by an ecstatic Times of Israel as having now decided to bring into the government possibly its most committed Jew yet, and certainly its most outspoken supporter of Israel, which Livingston called “the most amazing state in the world”.

Livingston is not elected. He’s appointed – and created a Lord to make it look kosher.

The newspaper went on to name other top Jewish figures in the Conservative party such as co-chairs Lord Feldman and Grant Shapps MP, senior treasurer Howard Leigh, a member of the Jewish Leadership Council; and former party treasurers Richard Harrington MP and Lord Fink, another member of the JLC.

“There are so many Jews at the top of Britain’s Conservative party, Prime Minister David Cameron once quipped, that it should be known as the Torah party rather than the Tory party,” crowed the paper.

While nobody is suggesting, I hope, that Jews have no place in our law-making, it is not unreasonable to wish the number to reflect their presence in the population.

And to make the prime minister feel thoroughly at home in his Torah party, a Jewish scholar, after tracing Cameron’s ancestry, claimed he could be “a direct descendant of Moses or, at least, a cousin”.

In case our American friends are puzzled by this Torah/Tory business, “Tory” is an old 17th century name for the modern Conservative Party, founded in the 1830s.

While nobody is suggesting, I hope, that Jews have no place in our law-making, it is not unreasonable to wish the number to reflect their presence in the population. Three years ago the Jewish Chronicle published a list of Jewish MPs in Britain’s Parliament, naming 24. The Jewish population in the UK at that time was – and probably still is – around 280,000 or just under 0.5 per cent. There are 650 seats in the House of Commons so, on a proportional basis, Jews could expect three seats. But with 24 they were eight times over-represented. Which meant, of course, that other groups were under-represented.

The UK’s Muslim population is about 2.4 million or nearly 4 per cent. Similarly, their quota would be 25 seats but they had only eight – a serious shortfall. If Muslims were over-represented to the same extent as Jews (i.e. eight times) they’d have 200 seats. Imagine the hullabaloo.

Israeli flag-waving a stepping-stone to high office

Over-representation in the House of Commons is only part of the picture. Many more Jews have been inserted into the House of Lords and other non-elected and unaccountable positions. An even bigger worry is the huge number of non-Jewish Zionists that have infiltrated every level of political and institutional life. They swell the pro-Israel lobby to such an extent that it is believed to account for 80 per cent of the Parliamentary Conservative Party, which now rules with the Liberal Democrats as their junior coalition partner.

Too many pro-Israel MPs speak and act as if they’d rather wave the Israeli flag than the Union Jack. These “Israel-firsters” never condemn the regime’s illegal occupation, apartheid-style policies, war crimes and refusal to sign up to nuclear non-proliferation, inspection and safeguards. They lock Britain (and British foreign policy) into Israel’s sickening ambitions and immorality. Defending the indefensible, as they do, inevitably raises questions for our national security, a deadly serious issue given the sheer number of Zionists now in British public life and the enemies they have made across the world, and continually provoke.

How do these Israeli flag wavers think it looks, standing shoulder to shoulder with religious fanatics and psychopaths who horribly persecute the Christian and Muslim communities of the Holy Land?

The Jewish Chronicle, in a 2006 special report “Team Cameron’s big Jewish backers”, revealed the support that enabled Cameron to suddenly burst into the political limelight, almost unknown, to take the Conservative leadership. With no significant achievement under his belt, he was then able to manoeuvre, with the help of his backers, into Britain’s prime minister slot.

He is also a self-declared Zionist and voted for the war in Iraq, so how trustworthy does that make him? In a speech to Jewish fundraisers in London last year, he declared: “There is no contradiction between being a proud Jew, a committed Zionist and a loyal British citizen.” How can someone who so closely aligns himself with a belligerent foreign military power like Israel hope to convince us that he’s 100 per cent loyal to Britain and its interests, while once again drawing us unwillingly into conflict with Israel’s enemies, this time Iran and Syria, with whom we have no quarrel?

Cameron’s foreign secretary, William Hague, has been a member of Conservative Friends of Israel since he was 15. Hague once said: “The unbroken thread of Conservative Party support for Israel that has run for nearly a century from the Balfour Declaration to the present day will continue.”

Alistair Burt, a former officer of the Parliamentary group of Conservative Friends of Israel, is Foreign Office minister for the Middle East. And David Lidington, who has spoken of being a “staunch defender” of the state of Israel, is Foreign Office minister for Europe.

So the key stooges are safely installed and activated.

Powerless to deliver justice

It is said that becoming a Friend of Israel is a necessary stepping-stone to high office. Consequently, fans of Israel are embedded at all levels in the fabric of British political life and at the heart of the government.

When a group of concerned academics wrote to the Committee on Standards in Public Life complaining about Israel’s “deep penetration”, they were told it was not something the committee could investigate. A closer look revealed that some members of the committee had close links with Friends of Israel.

How do these Israeli flag wavers think it looks, standing shoulder to shoulder with religious fanatics and psychopaths who horribly persecute the Christian and Muslim communities of the Holy Land? It is especially offensive to see them endorsing a pseudo-democracy that dishes out thuggish treatment even to children who, says the UN, are arrested by Israeli military and police and systematically subjected to degrading treatment, and often tortured. Read the report and weep.

Britain could, at a stroke, bring Israel to heel and force the regime to conform to international law or face massive trade penalties.  But the prancing posers who pass for our leaders have sold out. Cameron’s “Torah” party rules!

Thanks to its misplaced admiration for Israel, the British government fails to intervene and stand up for justice. The disgrace is unbearable. Here is just one of many appalling examples. Right now Christians in that once beautiful country are under imminent threat of losing their land, their livelihood and their way of life because an emergency law cooked up by the illegal occupier, Israel, and upheld by an Israeli court allows the Israelis to seize territory in the Cremisan Valley near Bethlehem. This brazen land-grab opens the way for the hated separation wall (ruled illegal by the International Court of Justice – ICJ) to be extended across the valley, connecting two Israeli settlements built on stolen Palestinian land in the eastern suburbs of Jerusalem.

The onward construction of the barrier will divide a Salesian Catholic monastery from the neighbouring Salesian Catholic convent, confiscate most of the convent’s property and cut off 58 Palestinian families from their agricultural lands – including vineyards, olive groves and pastures. The barrier will also separate families and surround an elementary school on three sides, forcing young children to pass through a checkpoint to go to class.

The ICJ required the wall to be dismantled, not extended. And it reminded all states party to the Fourth Geneva Convention that they are under an obligation “to ensure compliance by Israel with international humanitarian law as embodied in that Convention”. That was nine years ago. The world is still waiting. The states never act. Compliance never happens. Non-compliance is rife, and highly profitable to Israel.

And Israel’s allies, including Britain, perversely reward its non-compliance. Across the West Bank, continuing restrictions on Palestinian access to agricultural lands have led to the slow abandonment and eventual confiscation of those lands by the Israeli authorities.

As I write, Israel’s Knesset have approved the first reading of the Prawer Plan to remove 40,000 indigenous Bedouin people from their ancestral homeland in the Negev. This evil scheme clears the way for the 4-billion-dollar “Blueprint Negev” project intended to transform the Negev into a majority-Jewish area, even though the Bedouin have lived there for thousands of years.

At the same time one of Israel’s most dangerous lunatics, Avigdor Lieberman (chairman of the foreign affairs and defence committee), is calling for Israel, after imposing a vicious seven-year blockade, to conquer the Gaza Strip and carry out “a thorough cleansing”, just because Hamas still hasn’t succumbed to Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian homeland.

Britain could, at a stroke, bring Israel to heel and force the regime to conform to international law or face massive trade penalties.  But the prancing posers who pass for our leaders have sold out.

Cameron’s ‘Torah’ party rules!

The White House Threatens To End Aid if Palestine Joins the ICC

http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/the-white-house-threatens-to-end-aid-if-palestine-joins-the-icc/46097/

Fatou Bom Bensouda, the Gambian-born deputy prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), was never Washington’s first choice to succeed the inveterately self-promoting elitist ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo.

And it is doubtful that key Obama administration officials have changed their minds this week given Ms. Bensouda’s impassioned invitation on 6/27/13 to Palestine, urging its accession to the Rome Statute and the ICC, the former signed and ratified, as of this month, by 122 states with 31 additional countries, including Russia, having signed with ratification pending in their legislatures.

Visiting Al Jalil UNWRA high school across from Shatila camp here in Beirut recently, this observer was asked several questions by students and staff and the most frequent inquiry, which came as no surprise,  concerned why the Lebanese government, even those who claim to support the Palestinian cause, still have not acted in Parliament to grant Palestinian refugees the same elementary civil right to work and to own a home that every refugee everywhere, even in Zionist occupied Palestine, have long enjoyed.

The second most commonly asked question, did surprise me a bit and it was why the Palestinian leaders in Ramallah have not joined the International Criminal Court (ICC) in order to challenge the criminal, apartheid regime in occupied Tel Aviv and hold it accountable under international humanitarian law for crimes against Palestinian prisoners and more than a dozen equally brutal campaigns that target the indigenous population increasingly being condemned internationally.

From my time visiting Al Jalil School, it became clear that the students and faculty want their country, Palestine, to join the ICC.  One is advised that this sentiment is the same in all 54 Palestinian refugees’ schools in Lebanon and this insistence mirrors virtually all Palestinian, camps, groups and NGO’s with whom I have discussed the subject.

The new ICC Prosecutor Bensouda is also encouraging Palestine  to join the International Criminal Court, as she prepares for the cases that are likely to be filed with the ICC in the coming months.   Addressing this week’s Transitional Justice and International Justice the Arab World conference, she declared that her office believes Palestine qualifies to join the ICC after the UN General Assembly voted to admit Palestine as a non-member state last November.

The ICC prosecutor’s office is rumored in The Hague to be particularly impassioned and focused on those areas in which their chief, Ms. Bensouda, has particular international legal expertise. With the main area being international crimes comprising the category of continuous crimes against humanity, which, arguably, since 1948, have been most egregiously committed by the last 19^th century colonial enterprise that still brutally occupies Palestine.

Prosecutor Bensouda and her ICC staff is reported to be particularly intent on investigating continuing violations of basic humanitarian principles, standards and rules and both have spoken about the case  of Palestinian Maysara Abu Hamdiyeh, a cancer-sufferer who died in Israeli custody on 6/25/13  after the  Israeli government rejected repeated international calls and protests for his release. This, even as its officials conceded that Mr. Abu Hamidiyeh was no threat to society and could likely be successfully treated if allowed medical treatment for his life threatening condition.  One ICC investigator, who asked for anonymity, stated that she and her colleagues considered the actions of the Netanyahu government with respect to the Abu Hamidiyeh, and similar cases, to be “sick!”

The White House and its allies are not pleased by prospects for an eventful  next few years at the ICC. What have particularly unnerved outgoing UN Ambassador, Susan Rice and Israeli PM Netanyahu, are the 5/23/13 comments of Ms. Bensouda during the 38^th FIDH Congress in Istanbul which celebrated the 15^th anniversary of the Rome Statute which created the ICC.

“Gone are the days when those who commit international crimes, could be cleansed of their atrocities through a mere hand shake and a scribble of their initials on a piece of paper which purports to bind them to conditions that they have no intention of ever observing.”  She added: “My challenge is to consolidate what has been achieved, to build on from it, and to answer victims’ calls for justice. That is the promise made in Rome and that is the promise we cannot fail to fulfill”.

One the several “going out the door” comments Ms. Rice made on cleaning out her UN office on her way to become President Obama’s National Security Adviser, was basically a reiteration of her livid expressions made following last fall’s UN General Assembly vote giving Palestine its new international status. When asked if she considered the UN vote a repudiation of the Obama administration and her personally, Ms. Rice scolded:

“That resolution is not going to take them closer to statehood, or to the ICC!  It may actually make the environment more difficult for them and public references to the “State of Palestine” do not make it a sovereign state. Any reference to the ‘State of Palestine’ in the United Nations, including the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ on the placard in the Security Council or the use of the term ‘State of Palestine’ in the invitation  do not reflect acquiescence that ‘Palestine’ is a state,” she said.

It may be recalled that in a letter addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the President of the UN Security Council immediately following the 11/29/12  General Assembly vote, the permanent UN observer of Palestine reiterated his delegation’s position that ”all Israeli settlement activities are illegal, constituting grave breaches of article 49 (6) of the Fourth Geneva Convention and thus constituting war crimes, as further determined in accordance with article 8 (2) (b) (viii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Israel, the occupying Power, must be held accountable for all of the war crimes it is committing against the Palestinian people.”

This letter was cited by the most recent UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) report of February 2013, which also found Israel, as an occupying power, in violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention for ”transferring parts of its civilian population into territory that it occupies.”

Adding to all its currents problems, is this week’s announcement that President Obama’s “favorite general,”  Retired Gen. James “Hoss” Cartwright will likely cause yet more serious problems for the administration when details of his suspected leaks of information about a covert U.S.-Israeli cyber-attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear program, for which he is expected to soon be arrested and indicted. Coming on the heels of the Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks case, Washington is said to have no patience whatsoever, for Palestine making more problems and opening an ICC Pandora’s box.

Ramallah is being flooded with threats this month from Middle East envoy, Tony Blair,  US Secretary of State, John Kerry, now on his 5^th visit to the Middle East in as many months, Jordan’s King Hussein and reportedly, several others.  The message for Mahmoud Abbas is that the Palestinian Authority risks a cut-off of funds and US dis-engagement from any “peace process” as well as the scrapping of the rumored “mega economic & development  package” which Kerry aids are currently finalizing, if Palestine goes anywhere near the International Criminal Court.

It’s a tough call for President Mahmoud Abbas and his supporters because Hamas wants Palestine to immediately file cases against Israel at the ICC and so it appears, do a large majority of Palestinians, in Lebanon and internationally.

أ لـ مـ | يحيى أبو زكريا | مفهوم النفير العام في الإسلام

أ لـ مـ | يحيى أبو زكريا | مفهوم النفير العام في الإسلام

HRW Accuses Muslim Brotherhood of Inciting for Killing Shiites

HRW Accuses Muslim Brotherhood of Inciting for Killing Shiites

Local Editor

The United Nations Human Rights Watch accused on Thursday the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt of using hate speech for months and provoking the public opinion in the country against the Muslim Shiites. “The lynching of four Shiites by a mob apparently led by Salafist sheikhs in the village of Abu Musallim in Greater Cairo on June 23, 2013, came after months of anti-Shia hate speech at times involving the ruling Muslim Brotherhood and its political party,” HRW said. “The episode shows that the government needs to recognize that Shiites in Egypt are at risk and to take protective measure to ensure their protection and equal rights.” The watchdog also tackled the security forces who were present in the area and “failed over a period of three hours to intervene to halt the mob attack on a house where a group of Shiites had gathered for a religious feast,” calling for a serious investigation in the matter that “should address the role played by Salafist sheikhs against Shiite families in Abu Musallim.” “Mursi should state unequivocally that Shiites in Egypt have the right to practice their religious beliefs without fear and intimidation, something he has failed to do,” Human Rights Watch added. “The brutal sectarian lynching of four Shiites comes after two years of hate speech against the minority religious group, which the Muslim Brotherhood condoned and at times participated in,” said Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. “This horrific incident in Abu Musallim shows that Shiites can’t even gather in the privacy of their homes to celebrate and heightens fear of persecution among all religious minorities in Egypt.” The humanitarian organization further indicated that the anti-Shiite hate speech by Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood has been going on for two years. Human Rights Watch visited the village of Abu Musallim in the governorate of Giza and spoke to three witnesses, including one man who was in the house when it was attacked. Their accounts were supported by video footage of the events on June 23, when 24 Shiite residents gathered in the home of Arafat Ali Omar to celebrate a religious feast, the birth of the Imam Mohammad ibn Hassan al-Mahdi (as), the twelfth and last imam of Shiite Islam. Police later said that on the previous Friday sheikhs from local mosques called for the Shiites to be removed from the village. Some time after 3 p.m., a crowd of over 1,000 people gathered and two Salafist sheikhs were seen making phone calls and apparently directing people. The crowd began hurling stones and Molotov cocktails into the house. Four of the men inside, including Sheikh Hasan Shahata, left the house during the attack to protect those who remained inside, including women and children. The crowd attacked, beat, stabbed and lynched the four men. Video footage shows their bloodied lifeless bodies being kicked on the ground and then dragged through the streets.

Source: Websites 28-06-2013 – 20:04 Last updated 28-06-2013 – 20:04

Sheikh Hasan Shahata, 4 Others Killed in Sectarian Attack on House in Giza

Local Editor

Four devotees were martyred, including significant Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Hasan Shahata, on the hands of Salafists in Abu Mussalem, a village in the Egyptian city of Giza, who attacked his house while he was commemorating the 15th of Shaaban, which marked the birth anniversary of Imam Mahdi. Brutal scenes of the crime were broadcast on the internet late Sunday, and showed men dragging Sheikh Shahata’s body, which was covered with blood, on the street and beating him while chanting “Allahu Akbar”, without any apparent attempt by any side to stop them. Reports said that dozens of the devotees who attended Sheikh Shahata’s house for commemorating the holy day were also injured, and that children were among the casualties.

More

From Taksim to Tahrir: The Same Lesson

‏

من تقسيم إلى التحرير: الدرس واحد

السبت‏، 29‏ حزيران‏، 2013

أوقات الشام

المشهد نفسه والدرس واحد. من تقسيم في إسطنبول إلى ميدان التحرير في القاهرة. ترنّح النظام الإخواني في مصر لا بد أن ينعكس على حكم «العدالة والتنمية» في تركيا. أردوغان يدرك ذلك جيداً. يعلم أن سقوط مرسي يعني سقوط حساباته الداخلية والخارجية

حسني محلي

اسطنبول | يُحيي الشعب التركي غداً ذكرى الانتفاضة التي بدأت في ساحة تقسيم نهاية الشهر الماضي، في الوقت الذي تتجه فيه الأنظار الى ساحة التحرير، وباقي الساحات الرئيسية في مصر، حيث سيخرج شعبها للتعبير عن استنكارهم لسياسات الرئيس محمد مرسي، حالهم حال الشعب التركي الذي لم يعد يتحمل استبداد رئيس الحكومة رجب طيب أردوغان، خصوصاً بعدما قتل الأمن خمسة متظاهرين وأصاب 8000 آخرين بجراح، واعتقل حوالي 2000 حتى الآن. علماً أن البعض من هؤلاء الشباب والمثقفين الذين خرجوا الى الشوارع، كانوا قد أيّدوا أردوغان وحزبه في بدايات تسلّمه للسلطة على اعتباره حركة ديموقراطية.

تحول هؤلاء الآن الى ألدّ أعداء أردوغان، بعدما تبين لهم أن الأمور لم ولن تكون كما رأوها أو قيل لهم من قبل أصدقائهم في العواصم الغربية. وهذا حال شباب الثورة في مصر، الذين اعتقدوا أنّ الديموقراطية في نهاية المطاف هي الذهاب الى صناديق الاقتراع، حتى لو أدت الى تسليم السلطة للإخوان بنسبة 30 و 40 في المئة، كما جرى في تركيا في انتخابات 2002، حين حصل أردوغان على 36 في المئة من أصوات الناخبين، ولكن 66 في المئة من مقاعد البرلمان كانت كافية بالنسبة له لتحقيق أهدافه السياسية في إحكام السيطرة على مرافق ومؤسسات الدولة التركية، خصوصاً بعدما زادت أصواته لاحقاً بسبب نجاحاته الاقتصادية، التي جاءت نتيجة الدعم المالي الأميركي والأوروبي والعالمي له ولحزبه، الذي أراد الغرب له أن يكون نموذجاً إسلامياً ديموقراطياً يستخدم لاحقاً في الربيع العربي.

كما لم يتردد أردوغان في خصخصة ما قيمته 200 مليار دولار من مرافق القطاع العام ليساعده ذلك في تحقيق بعض النجاحات الاقتصادية التي ساهمت في زيادة شعبيته الانتخابية، ما دام المواطن غير مبال بحقائق الاقتصاد التركي، حيث إن 65 في المئة من القطاع المصرفي والبورصة استثمارات مالية أجنبية، حالها حال عدد كبير من القطاعات الأخرى بعدما زاد عدد الشركات الأجنبية المستثمرة في تركيا على 20 ألف شركة.وساعد كل ذلك أردوغان، وبدعم أميركي مباشر معلن وسري، في التخلص من أهم أعدائه، وهم الجنرالات، بعدما سيطر على البرلمان والقصر الجمهوري والمجلس الأعلى للتعليم العالي والمجلس الأعلى للإعلام وباقي مؤسـسات الدولة الأخرى. ولم يكتف بذلك، بل نجح من خلال الترهيب والإقناع، في السيطرة على عدد كبير من وسائل الإعلام التي كانت ضدّه، وتحول أصحابها الى أصدقاء له بفضل المشاريع والعقود التي حصلوا عليها من الدولة، وهو ما كان كافياً بالنسبة لهم لتحويل إذاعاتهم وتلفزيوناتهم وصحفهم الى أبواق للحكومة، التي لم يعد يتصدى لها الا عدد قليل وضعيف من وسائل الإعلام والإعلاميين المهددين دائماً بشكل مباشر وغير مباشر.

ويبدو أن الرئيس محمد مرسي يحاول الاستفادة من هذه الوسائل والطرق في حربه ضدّ وسائل الإعلام بعدما سيطر هو أيضاً على البعض منها، حاله بذلك حال أردوغان، الذي تربطه به روابط عقائدية إخوانية، بالإضافة الى الروابط التاريخية؛ فالسلطان سليم الذي فتح القاهرة في بداية 1517 بعد معركة الردانية، كان قد قاتل آنذاك المماليك وهم من أصل تركي. كما أن مؤسس مصر الجديدة هو محمد علي باشا ذو الأصل العثماني.

ويعني ذلك أن عقلية مرسي لن تختلف عن عقلية أردوغان وقادة «العدالة والتنمية» في التعامل مع المعطيات والتطورات السياسية، حيث تتحدث وسائل الإعلام التركية باستمرار عن استضافة تركيا للمئات والآلاف من الكوادر الليبية والتونسية والفلسطينية والمصرية لتدريبها في جميع المجالات العسكرية والأمنية والاستخباراتية والاقتصادية والمالية والدبلوماسية والإعلامية، كي يعودوا الى بلادهم ويطبقوا التكتيكات والاستراتيجيات التي تعلموها في تركيا. والهدف منها هو السيطرة على الدولة وجميع مرافقها بأسرع ما يمكن، وقبل أن ينتبه الآخرون الى خطورة الإخوان في هذه الدول، وخصوصاً مصر على اعتبارها قلعة الإخوان.ويبقى الرهان على عسكر مصر المعروفين بارتباطاتهم مع واشنطن، كما هي حال الجيش التركي، الذي قضى عليه أردوغان كي يتسنى لهم التفرغ للمعارضة السياسية، وهي ضعيفة بسبب خلافاتها الداخلية شأنها بذلك أيضاً شأن المعارضة المصرية، التي، وان نجحت في تحالفاتها غداً، ستشكل خطراً جدياً على الإخواني مرسي، ما قد يضطر واشنطن الى إعادة النظر في تحالفاتها معه بسبب الوضع الأقليمي، خاصة في سوريا وبعد التغييرات التي جرت في قطر وتلك المحتملة في السعودية، لا سيما بعدما شعر الغرب بخطورة التيار الإسلامي المتطرف، الذي استمد قوته من وصول الإسلاميين الإخوانيين الى السلطة في مصر وليبيا وتونس، وقبل ذلك تركيا، اللاعب الرئيسي في الملف السوري والواقع الإقليمي عموماً.

وهذا ما يفسر الرهان التركي المهم جداً على مستقبل الإخوان في مصر، لأن أردوغان يعرف جيداً أن سقوط مرسي ومعه التيار الإخواني الأم في مصر، يعني أن حسابات «العدالة والتنمية» الداخلية والخارجية ستسقط بدورها. وسيمنع ذلك أردوغان من تحويل تركيا الى دولة إسلامية استسلامية، كما سيمنعه من تحقيق حلمه الأكبر في أن يكون سلطاناً وخليفة للمسلمين بالتنسيق والتعاون مع المملوكي محمد مرسي، وإلا لما سمى الجسر الثالث على البوسفور بجسر السلطان سليم الذي حارب الصفويين الفرس في العام 1514، وقتل عشرات الآلاف من العلويين الأتراك ثم توجه الى سوريا ومنها الى مصر وتعني باللغة التركية الذرة.

وهذا ما يزيد من أهمية تظاهرات الأحد في مصر، لأنها لن تحدد مصير ومستقبل هذا البلد، بل المنطقة عموماً، خاصة أردوغان الذي لن يستطيع حينها أن يفعل ما فعله في الشعب التركي خلال تظاهرات تقسيم. وهنا على الشعب المصري أن يستخلص من تقسيم الدروس الوافية والكافية وقبل فوات الأوان.

وبات واضحاً الآن أن مصير تركيا اصبح مرتبطاً بمصير شباب مصر ومثقفيها، وما عليهم الا دراسة التجربة التركية بشكل واقعي، ولكن بعقلية مصرية وعربية، وليس كما يحاول الغرب ومعهم أتباعهم في الجزيرة والعربية أن يصورها لهم بألوان زاهية وهي في الحقيقة بين الأسود والرمادي.

---

تواريخ للذكرى

في 30 حزيران قبل عام، فاز محمد مرسي بالانتخابات الرئاسية بإجمالي 51 في المئة من الأصوات، ليصبح أول رئيس مدني وإسلامي في تاريخ البلاد.
– 5 آب، قتل مسلحون 16 جندياً مصرياً على نقطة حدودية بين مصر وفلسطين المحتلة قبل عبور حدود الدولة العبرية.
– 12 آب، ألغى مرسي اعلاناً دستوريًا يمنح سلطات واسعة للمجلس العسكري، وأحال المشير حسين طنطاوي، وزير الدفاع السابق، الذي حكم البلاد بعد سقوط حسني مبارك في شباط 2011، على التقاعد.
-22 تشرين الأول، أصدر إعلاناً دستورياً يمنحه سلطات واسعة.
– 30 تشرين الثاني: الجمعية التأسيسية لصياغة الدستور تقر مشروع الدستور بعد تصويت قاطعه ممثلو التيار المدني والكنيسة.
– 8 كانون الأول: ألغى مرسي الإعلان الدستوري، الذي يمنحه سلطات واسعة، لكنه أعلن عن استفتاء على الدستور، الذي صوت عليه الناخبون بنسبة 64 في المئة.
– 24 كانون الثاني من العام الحالي، اندلعت موجة جديدة من العنف بين المتظاهرين والشرطة، وقتل نحو 64 شخصاً معظمهم في بورسعيد.
2 حزيران الحالي، قضت المحكمة الدستورية العليا بعدم دستورية مجلس الشورى. وقبل اسبوع، توافد عشرات الآلاف من الاسلاميين الى الشارع تأييداً لمرسي قبل تظاهرات مرتقبة للمعارضة. وبعدها بيومين يحذر وزير الدفاع الفريق من أن الجيش سيتدخل إذا حدث اقتتال داخلي.

الاخبار

• هل سقط حمد لأنه لم يستطع اسقاط الاسد ؟
• مصر تشتعل ..قتيلان ومئات الجرحى برصاص الإخوان بالإسكندرية وانفجار عبوة ببورسعيد
• American among Three Killed in Clashes between Mursi’s Supporters, Opponents